Socialism

The global economy and the Internet are gradually blurring the significance of traditional territorial states. The role of the state in the physical protection of its citizens, due to the absence of a clear military threat, fades into the background, giving way to the struggle for more effective financial and cultural models. State power is crushing, and perhaps even swallowed up a long time ago by the power of various kinds of financial organizations, banks and international corporations. In history, there has already been opposition to this power, including through the active promotion and implementation of some ideas of socialism.

 Taking the ideas of common prosperity, justice, equality, and the like as the main distinguishing idea of ​​socialism, we will consider one of the ways to achieve this good through the socialization of ownership of the means of production, that is, of various kinds of tools that make it possible to achieve a given practical goal, or, more simply, to make work.

Aim for socialism

Perhaps, often it is worth talking about the goals themselves, that is, about justice, equality and prosperity. Let’s start with the latter – by prosperity, we mean good quality goods and services at an affordable price, here you can also include your own housing, etc., that is, everything related to the best organization of life.

Equality, apparently, implies relative equality of wealth and equality of rights, that is, the absence of any class division and advantages from having money. As for justice, if in my concept this is the fulfillment of agreements, then, in understanding the context of the goals of socialism, justice is the same as following the laws, which in turn should best correspond to the socialist goals of building communism.

Justice Prosperity

It is possible that the understanding of justice for the individual comes from a sense of injustice, just as we understand freedom when it is taken away from us. And then, if we turn to the specifics, the state of affairs when a rich person is a conditional capitalist and gets rich by owning something and being an employer pays low wages according to employees is considered unfair. And it would be fair for the employer to pay more.

There is a contradiction between the interests of the employer to save on wages and the interests of employees, which is solved in modern times through the creation of trade unions, the mass opportunity to boycott work. This contradiction is solved by the market way due to the competition of employers for the best workers.

The state can interfere directly or indirectly in these relations between the employee and the employer, creating jobs or obliging the employer to pay the minimum wage. All this makes it possible to smooth out social contradictions, but at the same time hinders market competition, and, as a result, the development of a competitive economy.

Injustice of possession

As for the direct possession of any means of production, it is difficult to see any injustice in this, since in itself it does not give anything for a better life, except for what you yourself are able to extract from the use of this means. In the same way, when you own a fishing net, you only benefit from it when you use it and do it better than others. But with a small catch, your actions may be disadvantageous. If you own a place along the river bed, and you put a network there, then you are already dramatically increasing your competitive advantages.

This applies to the extraction of resources from the outside, when, as regards the production of goods, everything is not so categorical, since almost any product has competition and may at any time become unclaimed, due to the appearance of a better analogue.

Injustice arises primarily in the possession of what is from nature and not created by one’s own labor. This type of property includes reservoirs and water, which are traditionally under the general control of the state. If they were private property with a monopoly set price for water, then we would not call this state of affairs fair.

 Public property.

Socialism extends this sense of injustice to all other ownership of the means of production. Public property cannot be a means of production, it can only be part of nature, or part of how we adapt to this nature, for example, shops, wells, lanterns. Public property, like nature, is common and should be administered by the state.

While the means of production are in fact the tools needed by a particular person to solve the tasks set by him for himself. These tools are a continuation of a person, an organic part of him, like hands and feet. But unlike body parts, tools allow you to carry out economic activities and all in all that survive under the circumstances in which the individual is found.

The optimal degree of socialism

The optimal degree of socialism can be seen in the fact that public ownership, as far as possible, extends to nature, natural resources, as well as everything that concerns the arrangement of nature for life, that is, communal facilities and infrastructure facilities.

Real estate, especially high-rise buildings, is part of nature and therefore may be partly owned by the state, locally subject to local governments. Residents of apartment buildings should have the right to adopt some of their own local rules for their life together, which would apply to all residents of a particular building or block.

In addition to the surrounding space, land and natural resources, everything that should not bring any profit can be public. The use of public natural resources or the occupation of land under private ownership must be agreed with the population living there, that is, with self-government bodies.

The state should promote self-government and arrangement of public property. This should prevent self-governing, unorganized private development. Any construction of new facilities must be coordinated with local governments. For example, no one should build anything to block existing roads or paths that serve a public purpose. Sufficient parking spaces should be thought out and agreed at shopping centers so that guest cars do not interfere with the life of local residents. The same applies to the construction of new commercial enterprises. It must be coordinated with local governments. I repeat, the state must maintain the legal status of self-government bodies.

Socialism as self-government

I see the origins of public welfare in local decentralized self-government. Residents organize self-government bodies that take responsibility for managing all traditionally public property.

Such self-government may well become the source of socialism as far as it is generally needed and possible. This approach will allow finding a balance between social and commercial interests. Since the latter will be forced to seek a compromise with the locals. And the residents themselves can indicate their interest for entrepreneurs, which many themselves will be. Such an interest may be not only financial return, but also, for example, priority in jobs for local residents, the obligation of an entrepreneur to hire primarily local specialists.