The Future of Socialism

Last updated
The Future of Socialism
Author Anthony Crosland
CountryUnited Kingdom
LanguageEnglish
SubjectsSocialism, Great Britain
Publisher Jonathan Cape
Publication date
1956
Media typePrint (hardcover)
Pages540 pp. (first edition)
OCLC 2162209
LC Class HX246 .C87

The Future of Socialism is a 1956 book by Anthony Crosland. It was one of the most influential books in post-war British Labour Party thinking. [1] It was the seminal work of the 'revisionist' school of Labour politics. [2]

Contents

The book defined Labour's perspective on the post-war consensus, by which the major parties largely agreed on issues of the welfare state and economic policy from 1945 to the late 1970s. [3]

Crosland, an Oxford University academic before entering Parliament, had lost his seat in the 1955 general election, and so was able to finish the book he had been working on for several years, seeking to offer a new argument for social democracy in the context of the new political and economic consensus introduced by the 1945–1951 Clement Attlee governments.

However, The Future of Socialism has continued to be a reference point for intellectual debates within the Labour Party and the centre-left in succeeding generations, including the SDP-Labour split in 1981, the modernisation of Labour under Neil Kinnock and the rise of New Labour. The book's 50th anniversary in 2006 sparked a new debate with leading Labour figures including Gordon Brown, Jack Straw, [4] Ed Miliband, [5] Roy Hattersley [6] and others setting out views of its relevance to the next generation of 'post-New Labour' politics. The Fabian Society, which co-published the 2006 edition, set out the argument about 'renewal' of Labour's thinking after a decade in power requires a further generation of 'revisionist' thinking which seeks to emulate Crosland's contribution in the 1950s.

Overview

A central argument in the book is Crosland's distinction between 'means' and 'ends'. Crosland demonstrates the variety of socialist thought over time, and argues that a definition of socialism founded on nationalisation and public ownership is mistaken, since these are simply one possible means to an end. For Crosland, the defining goal of the left should be more social equality. As a result, Crosland argued:

In Britain, equality of opportunity and social mobility [...] are not enough. They need to be combined with measures [...] to equalise the distribution of rewards and privileges so as to diminish the degree of class stratification, the injustices of large inequalities and the collective discontents.

Crosland also argued that an attack on unjustified inequalities would give any left party a political project to make the definition of the end point of 'how much equality' a secondary and more academic question.

Crosland also developed his argument about the nature of capitalism (developing the argument in his contribution 'The Transition from Capitalism' in the 1952 New Fabian Essays volume). Asking, "is this still capitalism?", Crosland argued that post-war capitalism had fundamentally changed, meaning that the Marxist claim that it was not possible to pursue equality in a capitalist economy was no longer true. Crosland wrote as follows:

The most characteristic features of capitalism have disappeared – the absolute rule of private property, the subjection of all life to market influences, the domination of the profit motive, the neutrality of government, typical laissez-faire division of income and the ideology of individual rights.

Crosland argued that these features of a reformed managerial capitalism were irreversible. Others, including those within the Labour Party, would later argue that Margaret Thatcher and Ronald Reagan brought about its reversal. [7]

A third important argument was Crosland's liberal vision of the 'good society'. Here his target was the dominance in Labour and Fabian thinking of Sidney Webb and Beatrice Webb, and a rather grey, top down bureaucratic vision of the socialist project. Following R. H. Tawney, Crosland stressed that equality would not mean uniformity:

We need not only higher exports and old-age pensions, but more open-air cafes, brighter and gayer streets at night, later closing hours for public houses, more local repertory theatres, better and more hospitable hoteliers and restaurateurs, brighter and cleaner eating houses, more riverside cafes, more pleasure gardens on the Battersea model, more murals and pictures in public places, better designs for furniture and pottery and women’s clothes, statues in the centre of new housing estates, better-designed new street lamps and telephone kiosks and so on ad infinitum.

Labour revisionism

Labour revisionism turned out to be a powerful ideological tendency within the Party in the 1950s and 1960s, taking intellectual sustenance from the Crosland book, and political leadership from Hugh Gaitskell. Other important intellectuals included Douglas Jay, Roy Jenkins, and the writers who contributed to Socialist Commentary. The goal was to reformulate socialist principles, and bring the Labour Party policies up to date with the changing British society and economy. Revisionism rejected what it described as an old view that socialism ought to be primarily identified with the ownership of the means of production. That meant that continuous nationalization was not a central goal. Second, was a series of political values focused on personal liberty, social welfare, and equality. Themes of class struggle were downplayed in favor of policies of high taxation, more widespread educational opportunity, and expanded social services. Revisionists insisted on the necessity of a market-oriented mixed economy with a central role for capitalism and entrepreneurship. [8] [9]

Reaction and reputation

The book was highly controversial at the time of its publication, given the heated dispute between the Gaitskellite and the Bevanite wings over the future direction of the Labour Party. A review of Crosland's book in the left-wing Tribune newspaper became famous for its headline "How dare he call himself a socialist". [10] The book was however largely positively received in the media and right-wing circles of the Labour Party.

Labour thinkers and academics have continued to debate the relevance of Crosland's thinking to more recent political debates within the party. A significant criticism of Crosland in the 1960s and 1970s made is that he had been too sanguine about the prospects for economic growth and so was concerned more about the distribution of wealth than its creation. He had written in The Future of Socialism as follows.

I no longer regard questions of growth and efficiency as being, on a long view, of primary importance to socialism. We stand in Britain on the threshold of mass abundance.

Crosland himself acknowledged in The Conservative Enemy (1962) the validity of the criticism of this view, and in this and his later writings and speeches he addressed the question of growth more centrally.

Crosland, New Labour and after

There are different views on the influence of Crosland on the creation of New Labour. Some see New Labour as arising directly from the revisionist tradition set out in The Future of Socialism, and applying these ideas to the politics of the 1990s. In particular, Tony Blair's decision to rewrite Clause Four of the Labour constitution is seen as achieving a central revisionist goal. [11]

However, New Labour was not keen to promote this link to the party's intellectual tradition, given the marketing of the party as having broken with the past. In substantive terms, while New Labour can be regarded as broadly revisionist, it was ambivalent and reluctant to explicitly commit itself to 'equality' as a goal of Labour politics, although its policies were redistributionist and aimed to reduce child poverty in particular. [12]

Politicians seen as representing the Crosland tradition, most notably former deputy leader Roy Hattersley, who were regarded as firmly on the right of Labour politics throughout their careers, have now tended to find themselves arguing from the left of New Labour. [13] However, leading New Labour figures have also drawn on Crosland's work. Gordon Brown has demonstrated a particular interest in Crosland and his legacy, giving a 1997 Crosland memorial lecture to the Fabian Society, (which was later published in the 1999 book Crosland and New Labour, edited by Dick Leonard), and writing the foreword for the 2006 50th anniversary edition of the book. Recent Labour Education Secretaries, including Ruth Kelly and Alan Johnson, have also drawn on Crosland's thinking in speeches and articles.

Despite its reputation and the frequency with which it is invoked in contemporary Labour debate, the book was out of print for some time. To mark its 50th anniversary, the book was republished by Constable & Robinson in association with the Fabian Society in the autumn of 2006, with a foreword from Brown, an introduction from Leonard and an afterword from Susan Crosland.

See also

Related Research Articles

<span class="mw-page-title-main">New Labour</span> Historical rebranding of the British Labour Party

New Labour was a period in the history of the British Labour Party from the mid to late 1990s until 2010 under the leadership of Tony Blair and Gordon Brown. The name dates from a conference slogan first used by the party in 1994, later seen in a draft manifesto which was published in 1996 and titled New Labour, New Life for Britain. It was presented as the brand of a newly reformed party that had altered Clause IV and endorsed market economics. The branding was extensively used while the party was in government between 1997 and 2010. New Labour was influenced by the political thinking of Anthony Crosland and the leadership of Blair and Brown as well as Peter Mandelson and Alastair Campbell's media campaigning. The political philosophy of New Labour was influenced by the party's development of Anthony Giddens' Third Way which attempted to provide a synthesis between capitalism and socialism. The party emphasised the importance of social justice, rather than equality, emphasising the need for equality of opportunity and believed in the use of markets to deliver economic efficiency and social justice.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Eduard Bernstein</span> German politician and theorist (1850–1932)

Eduard Bernstein was a German social democratic Marxist theorist and politician. A member of the Social Democratic Party of Germany (SPD), Bernstein had held close association to Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels, but he began to identify what he believed to be errors in Marxist thinking and began to criticize views held by Marxism when he investigated and challenged the Marxist materialist theory of history. He rejected significant parts of Marxist theory that were based upon Hegelian metaphysics and rejected the Hegelian perspective of an immanent economic necessity to socialism.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Anthony Crosland</span> British politician

Charles Anthony Raven Crosland was a British Labour Party politician and author. A social democrat on the right wing of the Labour Party, he was a prominent socialist intellectual. His influential book The Future of Socialism (1956) argued against many Marxist notions and the traditional Labour Party doctrine that expanding public ownership was essential to make socialism work, arguing instead for prioritising the end of poverty and improving public services. He offered positive alternatives to both the right wing and left wing of the Labour Party.

Social Reform or Revolution? is an 1899 pamphlet by Polish-German Marxist theorist Rosa Luxemburg. Luxemburg argues that trade unions, reformist political parties and the expansion of social democracy—while important to the proletariat's development of class consciousness—cannot create a socialist society as Eduard Bernstein, among others, argued. Instead, she argues from a historical materialist perspective that capitalism is economically unsustainable and will eventually collapse and that a revolution is necessary to transform capitalism into socialism. The pamphlet was heavily influential in revolutionary socialist circles and along with Luxemburg's other work an important precursor to left communist theory.

The post-war consensus, sometimes called the post-war compromise, was the economic order and social model of which the major political parties in post-war Britain shared a consensus supporting view, from the end of World War II in 1945 to the late-1970s. It ended during the governance of Conservative Party leader Margaret Thatcher. The consensus tolerated or encouraged nationalisation, strong trade unions, heavy regulation, high taxes, and an extensive welfare state.

Social democracy is a political, social, and economic philosophy within socialism that supports political and economic democracy. As a policy regime, it is described by academics as advocating economic and social interventions to promote social justice within the framework of a liberal-democratic polity and a capitalist-oriented mixed economy. The protocols and norms used to accomplish this involve a commitment to representative and participatory democracy, measures for income redistribution, regulation of the economy in the general interest, and social welfare provisions. Due to longstanding governance by social democratic parties during the post-war consensus and their influence on socioeconomic policy in Northern and Western Europe, social democracy became associated with Keynesianism, the Nordic model, the social-liberal paradigm, and welfare states within political circles in the late 20th century. It has been described as the most common form of Western or modern socialism, as well as the reformist wing of democratic socialism.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Blue Labour</span> Pressure group advocating small-c conservatism in the UK Labour Party

Blue Labour is a British campaign group and political faction that seeks to promote blue-collar and culturally conservative values within the British Labour Party — particularly on immigration, crime, and community spirit — while remaining committed to labour rights and left-wing economic policies. It seeks to represent a traditional working-class approach to Labour politics. Launched in 2009 as a counter to New Labour, the Blue Labour movement first rose to prominence after Labour's defeat in the 2010 general election, in which for the first time the party received fewer working-class votes than it did middle-class votes. The movement has influenced a handful of Labour MPs and frontbenchers; founder Maurice Glasman served as a close ally to Ed Miliband during his early years as Leader of the Opposition, before himself becoming a life peer in the House of Lords. The movement has also seen a resurgence of interest after the loss of red wall seats in the 2019 general election.

Marxism is a method of socioeconomic analysis that originates in the works of 19th century German philosophers Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels. Marxism analyzes and critiques the development of class society and especially of capitalism as well as the role of class struggles in systemic, economic, social and political change. It frames capitalism through a paradigm of exploitation and analyzes class relations and social conflict using a materialist interpretation of historical development – materialist in the sense that the politics and ideas of an epoch are determined by the way in which material production is carried on.

<i>The Purple Book</i> (Labour Party) 2011 essay collection

The Purple Book: A Progressive Future For Labour is a 2011 collection of essays by politicians in the UK's Labour Party, many of whom are considered to belong to the Blairite wing of the party. The book was conceived and promoted by Progress. It has been compared to The Orange Book: Reclaiming Liberalism, published seven years earlier by then-leading members of the UK's Liberal Democrats.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">One Nation Labour</span> Theme and branding of the British Labour Party adopted by the party in 2012

One Nation Labour refers to the theme and branding of the British Labour Party adopted by the party in 2012 under the leadership of Ed Miliband. Miliband described the "One Nation" term as being related to British Conservative Prime Minister Benjamin Disraeli's idea of One Nation conservatism. Disraeli claimed a need for government to reduce economic inequality, which he believed was splitting Britain into two nations of rich and poor people. Miliband stated that the theme of One Nation was shared by Labour Prime Minister Clement Attlee. Miliband has declared inspiration from Disraeli's and Attlee's One Nation theme, in that it challenges social barriers of class and promotes the unity of Britain.

Democratic socialism is a left-wing political philosophy that supports political democracy and some form of a socially owned economy, with a particular emphasis on economic democracy, workplace democracy, and workers' self-management within a market socialist economy or an alternative form of a decentralised planned socialist economy. Democratic socialists argue that capitalism is inherently incompatible with the values of freedom, equality, and solidarity and that these ideals can only be achieved through the realisation of a socialist society. Although most democratic socialists seek a gradual transition to socialism, democratic socialism can support revolutionary or reformist politics to establish socialism. Democratic socialism was popularised by socialists who opposed the backsliding towards a one-party state in the Soviet Union and other nations during the 20th century.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">History of the socialist movement in the United Kingdom</span> Aspect of history

Socialism in the United Kingdom is thought to stretch back to the 19th century from roots arising in the aftermath of the English Civil War. Notions of socialism in Great Britain have taken many different forms from the utopian philanthropism of Robert Owen through to the reformist electoral project enshrined in the birth of the Labour Party.

Liberal socialism is a political philosophy that incorporates liberal principles to socialism. 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. Liberal socialism refuses to abolish capitalism with a socialist economy and supports a mixed economy that includes both social ownership and private property in capital goods.

Anti-revisionism is a position within Marxism–Leninism which emerged in the 1950s in opposition to the reforms of Soviet leader Nikita Khrushchev. Where Khrushchev pursued an interpretation that differed from his predecessor Joseph Stalin, the anti-revisionists within the international communist movement remained dedicated to Stalin's ideological legacy and criticized the Soviet Union under Khrushchev and his successors as state capitalist and social imperialist.

Orthodox Marxism is the body of Marxist thought that emerged after the death of Karl Marx (1818–1883) and which became the official philosophy of the majority of the socialist movement as represented in the Second International until the First World War in 1914. Orthodox Marxism aims to simplify, codify and systematize Marxist method and theory by clarifying the perceived ambiguities and contradictions of classical Marxism.

Ethical socialism is a political philosophy that appeals to socialism on ethical and moral grounds as opposed to consumeristic, economic, and egoistic grounds. It emphasizes the need for a morally conscious economy based upon the principles of altruism, cooperation, and social justice while opposing possessive individualism.

Reformism is a political doctrine advocating the reform of an existing system or institution instead of its abolition and replacement.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Utopian socialism</span> Political theory concerned with imagined socialist societies

Utopian socialism is the term often used to describe the first current of modern socialism and socialist thought as exemplified by the work of Henri de Saint-Simon, Charles Fourier, Étienne Cabet, and Robert Owen. Utopian socialism is often described as the presentation of visions and outlines for imaginary or futuristic ideal societies, with positive ideals being the main reason for moving society in such a direction. Later socialists and critics of utopian socialism viewed utopian socialism as not being grounded in actual material conditions of existing society. These visions of ideal societies competed with revolutionary and social democratic movements.

<span class="mw-page-title-main">Outline of Marxism</span> Overview of and topical guide to Marxism

The following outline is provided as an overview of and topical guide to Marxism:

Social democracy originated as an ideology within the labour whose goals have been a social revolution to move away from purely laissez-faire capitalism to a social capitalism model sometimes called a social market economy. In a nonviolent revolution as in the case of evolutionary socialism, or the establishment and support of a welfare state. Its origins lie in the 1860s as a revolutionary socialism associated with orthodox Marxism. Starting in the 1890s, there was a dispute between committed revolutionary social democrats such as Rosa Luxemburg and reformist social democrats. The latter sided with Marxist revisionists such as Eduard Bernstein, who supported a more gradual approach grounded in liberal democracy and cross-class cooperation. Karl Kautsky represented a centrist position. By the 1920s, social democracy became the dominant political tendency, along with communism, within the international socialist movement, representing a form of democratic socialism with the aim of achieving socialism peacefully. By the 1910s, social democracy had spread worldwide and transitioned towards advocating an evolutionary change from capitalism to socialism using established political processes such as the parliament. In the late 1910s, socialist parties committed to revolutionary socialism renamed themselves as communist parties, causing a split in the socialist movement between these supporting the October Revolution and those opposing it. Social democrats who were opposed to the Bolsheviks later renamed themselves as democratic socialists in order to highlight their differences from communists and later in the 1920s from Marxist–Leninists, disagreeing with the latter on topics such as their opposition to liberal democracy whilst sharing common ideological roots.

References

  1. ↑ Jeffreys, Kevin (March 2006). "Tony Crosland, The Future of Socialism and New Labour". History Review. pp. 37–38. Retrieved 17 July 2009.
  2. ↑ Crosland sought to revise the Labour Party's constitutional commitment to the nationalisation of the means of production, distribution and exchange, (Aims, Clause four, party four): "If Socialism is defined as the nationalisation of the means of production, distribution and exchange, we produce solutions which deny almost all the values that socialists have normally read into the word.” Quoted by Hattersley in Hattersley, Roy, To imagine Labour's future, rewind 50 years, The Times online, September 15, 2006, accessed 27 June 2007
  3. ↑ Dutton, David. British Politics Since 1945: The Rise, Fall and Rebirth of Consensus (2nd ed. Blackwell, 1997). excerpt for political history seen from the Post-War Consensus viewpoint.
  4. ↑ Jack Straw, Socialism: the new divide, New Statesman, 18 September 2006, accessed 27 June 2007
  5. ↑ "Why ideology matters, Ed Miliband, Fabian Society". Archived from the original on May 20, 2007. Retrieved 2007-02-16.{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: bot: original URL status unknown (link), Google cached page accessed 27 June 2007
  6. ↑ Hattersley, Roy, To imagine Labour's future, rewind 50 years, The Times online, September 15, 2006, accessed 27 June 2007
  7. ↑ Eatwell, Roger; Wright, Anthony (1999). Contemporary Political Ideologies (2nd ed.). London: Continuum. p. 93. ISBN   9781855676053.
  8. ↑ Stephen Haseler, The Gaitskellites: Revisionism in the British Labour Party 1951–64 (Springer, 1969).
  9. ↑ F.M. Leventhal, Twentieth-century Britain: an encyclopedia (Peter Lang, 2002) pp 435-6.
  10. ↑ The New Statesman in 1959 compared those who wished to take his view of socialism out of the Labour Party with Christians wanting to drop Christ. It began: "The title of my sermon 'Should We Drop Christ?'". Cited by Miliband, "Why ideology matters, Ed Miliband, Fabian Society". Archived from the original on May 20, 2007. Retrieved 2007-02-16.{{cite web}}: CS1 maint: bot: original URL status unknown (link), Google cached page accessed 27 June 2007
  11. ↑ "he can justly claim to have been the original inspiration for the new Clause Four, which was Tony Blair's seminal achievement in the first few months of his leadership." Jack Straw,Socialism: the new divide, New Statesman, 18 September 2006, accessed 27 June 2007
  12. ↑ Steven Fielding The Labour Party: Continuity and Change in the making of new labour, Palgrave Macmillan, 2003, pp. 179-180, p.188 ISBN   0333973933
  13. ↑ cf. op cit

Further reading

This page is based on this Wikipedia article
Text is available under the CC BY-SA 4.0 license; additional terms may apply.
Images, videos and audio are available under their respective licenses.