PSIR Optional (Ideologies ) by Viraj C Rane

Model Answer

Question #1. List out the differences between Socialism and Marxism 10 marks (150 words)

Ideologies ( PSIR - Viraj Rane )

Q1. List out the differences between Socialism and Marxism

Approach:

• Introduction: Definitions of socialism and Marxism and their basic tenets
• Body: Differentiate b/w Socialism and Marxism on different parameters
• Conclusion: Limitations if any and the need for such comparison.

Socialism is an economic ideology under which each individual—through a democratically elected government—is given an equal share of the four factors or economic production: labor, entrepreneurship, capital goods, and natural resources. In essence, socialism is based on the assumption that all people naturally want to cooperate, but are restrained from doing so by the competitive nature of capitalism.

Marxism is an economic, political, and social ideology in which most or all property and resources are collectively owned by a class-free society rather than by individual citizens. According to the theory developed by the German philosopher, economist, and political theorist Karl Marx, Marxism results in a society in which all people are equal and there is no need for money or the accumulation of individual wealth. There is no private ownership of economic resources, with a central government controlling all facets of production. Economic output is distributed according to the needs of the people.

In both Marxism and socialism, the people own the factors of economic production. The main difference is that according to Marxism, most property and economic resources are owned and controlled by the state (rather than individual citizens); under socialism, all citizens share equally in economic resources as allocated by a democratically-elected government.

Key determinants:

• Distribution of economic production: Production is intended to meet all basic human needs and is distributed to the people at no charge according to Marxism. In Socialism, production is intended to meet individual and societal needs and distributed according to individual ability and contribution.
• Property: Socialists have therefore proposed that the institution of private property either be abolished and replaced by the common ownership of productive wealth, or, more modestly, that the right to property be balanced against the interests of the community. Karl Marx envisaged the abolition of private property. He clearly believed that property should be owned collectively and used for the benefit of humanity.
• Class distinction: In Marxist ideology, the concept of class is abolished. The ability to earn more than another worker is almost non-existent. For Socialism, classes exist but the differences are diminished. It is possible for some people to earn more than others.
• Religion: Religion is effectively abolished in Marxist though, but socialism allows freedom of religion.
• Equality: Socialists regard equality as a fundamental value and, in particular, endorse social equality. Marxism endorses absolute equality.
• Co-operation: Socialists believe that human beings can be motivated by moral incentives and not merely by material incentives. According to Marx, the moral incentive to work hard, however, is the desire to contribute to the common good, which develops out of a sympathy or sense of responsibility for fellow human beings.
• Method of transformation: Socialism advocates a peaceful method; Marxism advocates a violent revolution to establish a new order.

The difference between Marxism and socialism is not conveniently clear-cut. Both Marxism and socialism arose from protests against the exploitation of the working class during the Industrial Revolution. While applications of their economic and social policies vary, several modern countries—all ideologically opposed to capitalism—are perceived as either Marxist or socialist. In order to understand contemporary political debates, it's important to know the similarities and differences between Marxism and socialism.

Question #2. Do you agree that fascism as an ideology did not evolve but saw a mushroom growth during the inter-war period? 15 marks (250 words)

Approach:

• Focus: The importance of interwar period on the growth of fascism and if fascism lacks a clear evolutionary trend.
• Intro: The definition and basic features of fascism.
• Body: Evaluate the interwar period’s impact on the growth of fascism.
• Conclusion: Along with supporting statements by thinkers, we mention criticism of this proposition and alternative view points by scholars like Fromm.

William Ebenstein says that stripped to its essentials, fascism is the totalitarian organisation of government and society by a single party dictatorship which is intensely nationalist, militarist and imperialist. According to him although it lacks a coherent philosophy, the core principles can be said to be 1. Anti-rationalism 2. Struggle 3.  Leadership and elitism 4. Socialism 5. Ultranationalism

Whereas liberalism, conservatism and socialism are nineteenth-century ideologies, fascism is a child of the twentieth century, specifically of the period between the two world wars. Fascism emerged very much as a revolt against modernity, against the ideas and values of the Enlightenment. The Nazis in Germany proclaimed that ‘1789 is Abolished’. In Fascist Italy slogans such as ‘Believe, Obey, Fight’ and ‘Order, Authority, Justice’ replaced the more familiar principles of the French Revolution, ‘Liberty, Equality and Fraternity’. According to O’Sullivan, fascism came not only as a ‘bolt from the blue’, but also attempted to make the political world anew, quite literally to root out and destroy the inheritance of conventional political thought.

Fascist movements drew their membership and support largely from such lower middle-class elements. Lipset hence referred to fascism an ‘extremism of the centre’ a revolt of the lower middle classes, a fact that helps to explain the hostility of fascism to both capitalism and communism. Fascist regimes were not overthrown by popular revolt or protest but by defeat in the Second World War. Since 1945, fascist movements have achieved only marginal success, encouraging some to believe that fascism was a specifically interwar phenomenon (according to Ernst Nolte), linked to the unique combination of historical circumstances that characterized that period. Others, however, regard fascism as an ever-present danger, seeing its roots in human psychology.

Arguments in favour of fascism as inter-war phenomenon:

• Treaty of Versailles: Versailles Peace Treaty had disappointed the Italians since it could not obtain any share in the German overseas territories which the other allied powers had secured. The military leaders in Italy were disappointed as the victory had not benefitted their country in any way.
• Socio-economic conditions of Italy: The economic structure had collapsed due to war and natural resources were scarce. It was argued by the supporters of fascism that Italy, under such terrible conditions, will be saved by the Fascist revolution.
• Socialism and Nationalism: These two forces were particularly more prominent in Italy than in any other country in Europe. Italians were disgruntled elements for loss of spoils of victory. At this juncture, Mussolini appeared on the scene with claims to reconcile the seemingly conflicting forces of socialism and nationalism. His new political party suggested a happy union of nationalism and socialism.
• Rise of Communism: Mussolini claimed that the post-war labour unrest and discontent in Italy were leading the country towards communism and his party, Fascisiti, alone could save the society from the danger of communism.
• False Aspirations of Italians: The feeling of disappointment owing to the Rise of Fascism and Nazism marginalization and subsequent loss in the Peace Settlement of 1919 left a feeling among Italians that though Italy had won the war, it had lost the peace. The disappointments and frustrations of the Italians were fully exploited by Mussolini.

But others questioned the proposition that fascism was merely a product of a specific time in history. Erich Fromm traces the emergence of fascism to human psychology. Fromm suggest that it is an ever-present threat as it is based on political opportunism that exploits collective human insecurity and fear. Hannah Arendt also says that fascism is rooted in cultural problem.

The rise in ultranationalist governments across the world in the present day where the political leaders are able to manipulate people by targeting their vulnerabilities indeed raises questions about the possibility of emergence of fascism in the 21^st century in conditions that are far different from the interwar period.