Welfare in Socialist Society
Ramesh Mishra
Abstract
Ramesh Mishra
Abstract
Our basic concerns in this chapter 1 are the same as in the last — the nature, development and consequences of welfare — but in the context of socialist society. Before moving on to substantive issues, however, a number of points need to be made clear. First, by ‘socialist’ we mean societies, e.g. the U.S.S.R., where the means of production are collectively owned and there is at least a formal commitment to Marxian socialist ideology. Our use of the term ‘socialist’ does not imply that these societies also display various other features of social structure, e.g. equality or democracy, associated with socialism. Undoubtedly, egalitarianism is one of the main elements of Marxian socialism — the ideological inspiration behind these societies. But how far this ideology informs the practice of welfare remains to be seen. This brings us to the second point, namely that the U.S.S.R. and most other socialist countries were economically backward at the time of revolution. This is a fact of considerable importance for understanding the social structure of these societies. For Marx’s theories were largely concerned with the developed capitalist society. The distributive and other features of the post-capitalist (socialist) society envisaged by Marxism presuppose a high level of social and economic development. Yet revolutions inspired by Marx’s teachings have occurred mainly in pre-industrial societies, notably Russia and China.
A significance statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Our basic concerns in this chapter 1 are the same as in the last — the nature, development and consequences of welfare — but in the context of socialist society. Before moving on to substantive issues, however, a number of points need to be made clear. First, by ‘socialist’ we mean societies, e.g. the U.S.S.R., where the means of production are collectively owned and there is at least a formal commitment to Marxian socialist ideology. Our use of the term ‘socialist’ does not imply that these societies also display various other features of social structure, e.g. equality or democracy, associated with socialism. Undoubtedly, egalitarianism is one of the main elements of Marxian socialism — the ideological inspiration behind these societies. But how far this ideology informs the practice of welfare remains to be seen. This brings us to the second point, namely that the U.S.S.R. and most other socialist countries were economically backward at the time of revolution. This is a fact of considerable importance for understanding the social structure of these societies. For Marx’s theories were largely concerned with the developed capitalist society. The distributive and other features of the post-capitalist (socialist) society envisaged by Marxism presuppose a high level of social and economic development. Yet revolutions inspired by Marx’s teachings have occurred mainly in pre-industrial societies, notably Russia and China.
Key concepts: Ideology, Socialism, Egalitarianism, Political economy, Socialist economics, Welfare state, Context (archaeology), Democracy