Chapter 10: Socialism

Small tribes begat small villages which, thanks to the powers of a healthy ability to procreate without the fear of culling by predators or disease, begat really, really large cities and nation states. And so began the eternal question of, "what the hell are we going to do with all these intelligent, territorial primates living on top of one another?". Religion, of course, was a powerful and practical answer to keeping man from regressing to his base nature. "Go forth and multiply in My (fill in the name of the deity here) Name!" was a clever device that permitted the expression of a genetic code that had permeated all life since the evolution of the slime mold. And since it was so pleasurable it was wise of the Leaders not to inhibit it. "Do no harm!" was the gist of the rest of the rules a Commandment designed to bring some sort of order to the masses.

In a more enlightened age secular governments were almost inevitable. There were always going to be a few transitional examples were the major Religious Organisations were not going to happily relinquish power over their "flock". After all, there was just too much money in it ("tithes" + "donations" = "taxes"). Plenty of examples of despotic Church/State autocracies abound in the world still exist today. However, just as inevitably, new concepts based on the dignity and rights of the common man were going to evolve and grow in competition to the old established orders. Unfortunately, Socialism wasn't the best of them.

Maslow's Hierarchy of Needs is a time-proven image of our intelligent simians' behaviours: "Physiological needs are the physical requirements for human survival. If these requirements are not met, the human body cannot function properly and will ultimately fail. Physiological needs are thought to be the most important; they should be met first". It further defines such physiological needs: "Air, water, and food are metabolic requirements for survival in all animals, including humans. Clothing and shelter provide necessary protection from the elements. While maintaining an adequate birth rate shapes the intensity of the human sexual instinct, sexual competition may also shape said instinct". So if our city/nation states must be governed then it would be an admirable thing if everyone could ensure that all these basic human needs are met by said government. Why, you could almost enshrine it in a Bill of Human Rights!

So when did such admirable socialistic tendencies go awry? The first reason is the fact that most ideologues miss the point: all intelligent monkeys aspire to a life better than the one they live in. This is an absolute reality: if it were not, there would be no religions aspiring to godhood; there would be no aspirations to wealth and happiness; there would be no struggle! Return to our imaginary village. As the reduced threat of sudden death from war and disease released the populace from a daily struggle to survive so their efforts turned to improving the lot of their lives and the lives of their loved ones. Excess products of their efforts became a source of additional value, especially if traded to other communities where such products were not in abundance. From there came the rise of the Merchant Princes, those people whose vision and imagination permitted them to take greater risks in return for more material rewards. And, in turn, they became wealth creators, employing others in the establishment of even more sophisticated systems of trade.

All well and good, as this meant that an intrinsic economy grew. But it led to divisions of wealth; the rich and the poor!!! And no matter how many people were employed as bodyguards for the trade caravans there would always be those that would take what they wanted. Selfish, acquisitive primate behaviour. So how does socialism fail in this scenario? Because, instead of its noble heritage of protecting the dignity of the individual it became a Politics of Envy. Instead of recognising that individuals have an aspiration to also become wealthy, to attain a degree of luxury above the "common man" standard, it applied a lowest common denominator to all human activity. Ultimately, all must become poor because the sad fact of this Age Of Scarcity is that no one group has access to unlimited resources. Therefore, it cannot be fair that a few have more than the "rest of us". Anyone who does will be taxed heavily (90% of their income?). Like all the religions it tries to replace, the politics of Socialism demands total obedience to a single doctrine. One size fits all! 

Once the ideology had taken hold there was no stopping it. The only way to to ensure a fair distribution of all resources is for the State to totally control the population; to take control of every aspect of a modern civilisation's infrastructure. Nationalise the communications network, the roads and railways. Nationalise the factories, one style for everyone (in a land of scarce resources multiple styles are wasteful). Behaviours must be modified, deviations are inefficient. Human endeavour must be maximised, factories are built and maintained without any regard for the need for the the goods produced. Holes are dug and filled in without purpose. Right-footed shoes are built in one factory and left-footed shoes are built in another. This may sound hysterical but it is exactly what happened in the Russian Communist regime.

But wait a minute! Wasn't the original socialist concept all to do with the Dignity of Man? All of humankind struggled to provide food and shelter, not just for the individual, but their spouses and offspring; not just for their families but their communities; not just for their communities but for their nation-states. And if an ever-burgeoning capitalist economy arising from the descendants of the Merchant Princes threatens the values and security of the "village workers" then wasn't it reasonable for the beleaguered workers to organise? To protect themselves? 

Thus evolved another piece of communist mystique, the TRADE UNIONS.