View source for Social:Socialism

{{short description|Sociopolitical economic philosophy and system}}
{{socialism sidebar}}
{{party politics|platform}}
{{economic systems sidebar}}

'''Socialism''' is an [[Finance:Economic ideology|economic]] and [[Philosophy:Political philosophy|political philosophy]] encompassing diverse [[Finance:Economic system|economic]] and [[Social:Social system|social system]]s<ref>{{harvp|Busky|2000|p=2}}: "Socialism may be defined as movements for social ownership and control of the economy. It is this idea that is the common element found in the many forms of socialism."</ref> characterised by [[Social:Social ownership|social ownership]] of the [[Social:Means of production|means of production]],<ref>
* {{harvp|Busky|2000|p=2}}: "Socialism may be defined as movements for social ownership and control of the economy. It is this idea that is the common element found in the many forms of socialism."
* {{harvp|Arnold|1994|pp=[https://archive.org/details/philosophyeconom00arno/page/n21 7]–8}}: "What else does a socialist economic system involve? Those who favor socialism generally speak of social ownership, social control, or socialization of the means of production as the distinctive positive feature of a socialist economic system."
* {{harvp|Horvat|2000|pp=1515–1516}}: "Just as private ownership defines capitalism, social ownership defines socialism. The essential characteristic of socialism in theory is that it destroys social hierarchies, and therefore leads to a politically and economically egalitarian society. Two closely related consequences follow. First, every individual is entitled to an equal ownership share that earns an aliquot part of the total social dividend... Second, in order to eliminate social hierarchy in the workplace, enterprises are run by those employed, and not by the representatives of private or state capital. Thus, the well-known historical tendency of the divorce between ownership and management is brought to an end. The society—i.e. every individual equally—owns capital and those who work are entitled to manage their own economic affairs."
* {{harvp|Rosser|Barkley|2003|p=53}}: "Socialism is an economic system characterised by state or collective ownership of the means of production, land, and capital.";
* {{harvp|Badie|Berg-Schlosser|Morlino|2011|p=2456}}: "Socialist systems are those regimes based on the economic and political theory of socialism, which advocates public ownership and cooperative management of the means of production and allocation of resources."
* {{harvp|Zimbalist|Sherman|Brown|1988|p=7}}: "Pure socialism is defined as a system wherein all of the means of production are owned and run by the government and/or cooperative, nonprofit groups."
* {{harvp|Brus|2015|p=87}}: "This alteration in the relationship between economy and politics is evident in the very definition of a socialist economic system. The basic characteristic of such a system is generally reckoned to be the predominance of the social ownership of the means of production."
* {{cite book |last1=Hastings |first1=Adrian |last2=Mason |first2=Alistair |last3=Pyper |first3=Hugh |title=The Oxford Companion to Christian Thought |publisher=[[Organization:Oxford University Press|Oxford University Press]] |year=2000 |isbn=978-0198600244 |page=[https://archive.org/details/oxfordcompaniont00hast/page/677 677] |quote=Socialists have always recognized that there are many possible forms of social ownership of which co-operative ownership is one...Nevertheless, socialism has throughout its history been inseparable from some form of common ownership. By its very nature it involves the abolition of private ownership of capital; bringing the means of production, distribution, and exchange into public ownership and control is central to its philosophy. It is difficult to see how it can survive, in theory or practice, without this central idea.|url=https://archive.org/details/oxfordcompaniont00hast/page/677}}</ref> as opposed to [[Finance:Private property|private ownership]].{{sfnp|Horvat|2000|pp=1515–1516}}{{sfnp|Arnold|1994|pp=7–8}}<ref name="oxfordcomp">{{cite book |last1=Hastings |first1=Adrian |last2=Mason |first2=Alistair |last3=Pyper |first3=Hugh |title=The Oxford Companion to Christian Thought |publisher=[[Organization:Oxford University Press|Oxford University Press]] |year=2000 |isbn=978-0198600244 |page=[https://archive.org/details/oxfordcompaniont00hast/page/677 677] |quote=Socialists have always recognized that there are many possible forms of social ownership of which co-operative ownership is one...Nevertheless, socialism has throughout its history been inseparable from some form of common ownership. By its very nature it involves the abolition of private ownership of capital; bringing the means of production, distribution, and exchange into public ownership and control is central to its philosophy. It is difficult to see how it can survive, in theory or practice, without this central idea.|url=https://archive.org/details/oxfordcompaniont00hast/page/677}}</ref> It describes the [[Finance:Economic ideology|economic]], [[Philosophy:Political philosophy|political]], and [[Social:Social theory|social]] theories and [[Social:Political movement|movements]] associated with the implementation of such systems.<ref name="Socialism at The Free dictionary">{{cite web |url=http://www.thefreedictionary.com/socialism |title=Socialism |website=The Free Dictionary |quote=2. (Government, Politics & Diplomacy) any of various social or political theories or movements in which the common welfare is to be achieved through the establishment of a socialist economic system. |access-date=27 January 2020}}</ref> Social ownership can take various forms including: [[Social:State ownership|public]], [[Social:Community ownership|community]], [[Social:Collective ownership|collective]], [[Finance:Cooperative|cooperative]],<ref>{{cite book |last1=Sherman |first1=Howard J.|last2=Zimbalist |first2=Andrew |title=Comparing Economic Systems: A Political-Economic Approach |publisher=Harcourt College Pub |date=1988 |isbn=978-0-15-512403-5 |page=[https://archive.org/details/comparingeconomi0000zimb_q8i6/page/7 7] |quote=Pure socialism is defined as a system wherein all of the means of production are owned and run by the government and/or cooperative, nonprofit groups. |url=https://archive.org/details/comparingeconomi0000zimb_q8i6/page/7}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |last1=Rosser |first1=Mariana V. |last2=Rosser |first2=J. Barkley |title=Comparative Economics in a Transforming World Economy |url=https://archive.org/details/comparativeecono00jrjb |url-access=limited |publisher=MIT Press |date=23 July 2003 |isbn=978-0-262-18234-8 |page=[https://archive.org/details/comparativeecono00jrjb/page/n64 53]|quote=Socialism is an economic system characterised by state or collective ownership of the means of production, land, and capital.}}</ref><ref>{{harvp|Badie|Berg-Schlosser|Morlino|2011|p=2456}}: "Socialist systems are those regimes based on the economic and political theory of socialism, which advocates public ownership and cooperative management of the means of production and allocation of resources."</ref> or [[Finance:Employee stock ownership|employee]].<ref name="Horvat 2000">{{harvp|Horvat|2000|pp=[https://books.google.com/books?id=ip_IAgAAQBAJ&pg=PA1516 1515–1516]}}: "Just as private ownership defines capitalism, social ownership defines socialism. The essential characteristic of socialism in theory is that it destroys social hierarchies, and therefore leads to a politically and economically egalitarian society. Two closely related consequences follow. First, every individual is entitled to an equal ownership share that earns an aliquot part of the total social dividend...Second, in order to eliminate social hierarchy in the workplace, enterprises are run by those employed, and not by the representatives of private or state capital. Thus, the well-known historical tendency of the divorce between ownership and management is brought to an end. The society—i.e. every individual equally—owns capital and those who work are entitled to manage their own economic affairs."</ref><ref>{{cite book |last=O'Hara |first=Phillip |title=Encyclopedia of Political Economy |volume=2 |publisher=[[Company:Routledge|Routledge]] |date=2003 |isbn=978-0415241878 |page=71 |quote=In order of increasing decentralisation (at least) three forms of socialised ownership can be distinguished: state-owned firms, employee-owned (or socially) owned firms, and citizen ownership of equity.}}</ref> No single definition encapsulates the many [[Social:Types of socialism|types of socialism]],{{sfnp|Lamb|Docherty|2006|p=1}} but social ownership is the common element.{{sfnp|Arnold|1994|pp=7–8}}<ref>{{cite book |last1=Hastings |first1=Adrian |last2=Mason |first2=Alistair |last3=Pyper |first3=Hugh |title=The Oxford Companion to Christian Thought |publisher=[[Organization:Oxford University Press|Oxford University Press]] |year=2000 |isbn=978-0198600244 |page=[https://archive.org/details/oxfordcompaniont00hast/page/677 677] |quote=Socialists have always recognised that there are many possible forms of social ownership of which co-operative ownership is one ... Nevertheless, socialism has throughout its history been inseparable from some form of common ownership. By its very nature it involves the abolition of private ownership of capital; bringing the means of production, distribution, and exchange into public ownership and control is central to its philosophy. It is difficult to see how it can survive, in theory or practice, without this central idea. |url=https://archive.org/details/oxfordcompaniont00hast/page/677}}</ref> Traditionally, socialism is on the [[Social:Left-wing politics|left-wing]] of the [[Social:Political spectrum|political spectrum]].<ref>{{cite encyclopedia |date=15 April 2009 |title=Left |url=https://www.britannica.com/topic/left |access-date=22 May 2022 |encyclopedia=[[Encyclopædia Britannica]] |quote=Socialism is the standard leftist ideology in most countries of the world; ... .}}</ref> Types of socialism vary based on the role of markets and planning in resource allocation, the structure of management in organizations, and different approaches from below or from above. Some socialists favour a party, state, or technocratic-driven approach, while others disagree on whether government is the correct vehicle for change.<ref name="Nove">{{cite web |last=Nove |first=Alec |title=Socialism |website=New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics |edition=Second |date=2008 |publisher=[[Company:Palgrave Macmillan|Palgrave Macmillan]] |url=http://www.dictionaryofeconomics.com/article?id=pde2008_S000173 |quote=A society may be defined as socialist if the major part of the means of production of goods and services is in some sense socially owned and operated, by state, socialised or cooperative enterprises. The practical issues of socialism comprise the relationships between management and workforce within the enterprise, the interrelationships between production units (plan versus markets), and, if the state owns and operates any part of the economy, who controls it and how.}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |editor1-last=Docherty |editor1-first=James C. |editor2-last=Lamb |editor2-first=Peter |date=2006 |title=Historical Dictionary of Socialism |edition=2nd |series=Historical Dictionaries of Religions, Philosophies, and Movements |volume=73 |location=Lanham, Maryland |publisher=Scarecrow Press |pages=1–3 |isbn=978-0810855601}}</ref>

Socialist systems divide into [[Social:Economic planning|non-market]] and [[Finance:Market (economics)|market]] forms.<ref name="Kolb">{{cite book |last=Kolb |first=Robert |title=Encyclopedia of Business Ethics and Society, First Edition |publisher=SAGE Publications, Inc |date=2007 |isbn=978-1412916523 |page=1345 |quote=There are many forms of socialism, all of which eliminate private ownership of capital and replace it with collective ownership. These many forms, all focused on advancing distributive justice for long-term social welfare, can be divided into two broad types of socialism: nonmarket and market.}}</ref> Non-market socialism substitutes factor markets with integrated [[Social:Economic planning|economic planning]] and engineering, or technical criteria based on [[Social:Calculation in kind|calculation performed in-kind]], thereby producing a different economic mechanism that functions according to different [[Finance:Law of value|economic laws]] and [[System dynamics|dynamics]] than those of [[Philosophy:Capitalism|capitalism]].<ref>{{harvp|Bockman|2011|p=20}}: "socialism would function without capitalist economic categories—such as money, prices, interest, profits and rent—and thus would function according to laws other than those described by current economic science. While some socialists recognised the need for money and prices at least during the transition from capitalism to socialism, socialists more commonly believed that the socialist economy would soon administratively mobilise the economy in physical units without the use of prices or money."; {{harvp|Steele|1999|pp=175–177}}: "Especially before the 1930s, many socialists and anti-socialists implicitly accepted some form of the following for the incompatibility of state-owned industry and factor markets. A market transaction is an exchange of property titles between two independent transactors. Thus internal market exchanges cease when all of industry is brought into the ownership of a single entity, whether the state or some other organization, ... the discussion applies equally to any form of social or community ownership, where the owning entity is conceived as a single organization or administration."; {{harvp|Arneson|1992}}: "Marxian socialism is often identified with the call to organize economic activity on a nonmarket basis."; {{harvp|Schweickart|Lawler|Ticktin|Ollman|1998|pp=61–63}}: "More fundamentally, a socialist society must be one in which the economy is run on the principle of the direct satisfaction of human needs. ... Exchange-value, prices and so money are goals in themselves in a capitalist society or in any market. There is no necessary connection between the accumulation of capital or sums of money and human welfare. Under conditions of backwardness, the spur of money and the accumulation of wealth has led to a massive growth in industry and technology ... . It seems an odd argument to say that a capitalist will only be efficient in producing use-value of a good quality when trying to make more money than the next capitalist. It would seem easier to rely on the planning of use-values in a rational way, which because there is no duplication, would be produced more cheaply and be of a higher quality."</ref> A non-market socialist system seeks to eliminate the perceived [[Philosophy:Criticism of capitalism#Inefficiency, irrationality, and unpredictability|inefficiencies, irrationalities, unpredictability]], and [[Finance:Financial crisis|crises]] that socialists traditionally associate with [[Finance:Capital accumulation|capital accumulation]] and the [[Finance:Profit (economics)|profit]] system.<ref>{{harvp|Nove|1991|p=13}}: "Under socialism, by definition, it (private property and factor markets) would be eliminated. There would then be something like 'scientific management', 'the science of socially organized production', but it would not be economics."; {{harvp|Kotz|2006}}: "This understanding of socialism was held not just by revolutionary Marxist socialists but also by evolutionary socialists, Christian socialists, and even anarchists. At that time, there was also wide agreement about the basic institutions of the future socialist system: public ownership instead of private ownership of the means of production, economic planning instead of market forces, production for use instead of for profit."; {{harvp|Weisskopf|1992}}: "Socialism has historically been committed to the improvement of people's material standards of living. Indeed, in earlier days many socialists saw the promotion of improving material living standards as the primary basis for socialism's claim to superiority over capitalism, for socialism was to overcome the irrationality and inefficiency seen as endemic to a capitalist system of economic organization."; {{harvp|Prychitko|2002|p=12}}: "Socialism is a system based upon de facto public or social ownership of the means of production, the abolition of a hierarchical division of labor in the enterprise, a consciously organized social division of labor. Under socialism, money, competitive pricing, and profit-loss accounting would be destroyed."</ref> [[Social:Market socialism|Market socialism]] retains the use of monetary prices, factor markets and in some cases the [[Finance:Profit motive|profit motive]], with respect to the operation of socially owned enterprises and the allocation of capital goods between them. Profits generated by these firms would be controlled directly by the workforce of each firm or accrue to society at large in the form of a [[Social:Social dividend|social dividend]].<ref name="Social Dividend versus Basic Income Guarantee in Market Socialism, 2004">{{cite journal |last=Marangos |first=John |date=2004 |title=Social Dividend versus Basic Income Guarantee in Market Socialism |journal=[[Finance:International Journal of Political Economy|International Journal of Political Economy]] |publisher=Taylor & Francis |volume=34 |issue=3 |pages=20–40 |doi=10.1080/08911916.2004.11042930 |jstor=40470892 |s2cid=153267388}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |last=O'Hara |first=Phillip |title=Encyclopedia of Political Economy |volume=2 |publisher=[[Company:Routledge|Routledge]] |date=2000 |isbn=978-0415241878 |page=71 |quote=Market socialism is the general designation for a number of models of economic systems. On the one hand, the market mechanism is utilized to distribute economic output, to organize production and to allocate factor inputs. On the other hand, the economic surplus accrues to society at large rather than to a class of private (capitalist) owners, through some form of collective, public or social ownership of capital.}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |last=Pierson |first=Christopher |title=Socialism After Communism: The New Market Socialism |publisher=Pennsylvania State University Press |date=1995 |isbn=978-0271-014784 |page=96 |quote=At the heart of the market socialist model is the abolition of the large-scale private ownership of capital and its replacement by some form of 'social ownership'. Even the most conservative accounts of market socialism insist that this abolition of large-scale holdings of private capital is essential. This requirement is fully consistent with the market socialists' general claim that the vices of market capitalism lie not with the institutions of the market but with (the consequences of) the private ownership of capital ... .}}</ref>

Socialist parties and ideas remain a political force with varying degrees of power and influence, heading national governments in several countries. Socialist politics have been [[Social:Proletarian internationalism|internationalist]] and nationalist; organised through political parties and opposed to party politics; at times overlapping with trade unions and other times independent and critical of them, and present in industrialised and developing nations.<ref>{{harvp|Newman|2005|p=2}}: "In fact, socialism has been both centralist and local; organized from above and built from below; visionary and pragmatic; revolutionary and reformist; anti-state and statist; internationalist and nationalist; harnessed to political parties and shunning them; an outgrowth of trade unionism and independent of it; a feature of rich industrialized countries and poor peasant-based communities."</ref> 

[[Philosophy:Social democracy|Social democracy]] originated within the socialist movement,<ref>{{cite book |last=Ely |first=Richard T. |date=1883 |title=French and German Socialism in Modern Times |location=New York |publisher=Harper and Brothers |pages=204–205 |quote=Social democrats forms the extreme wing of the socialists ... inclined to lay so much stress on equality of enjoyment, regardless of the value of one's labor, that they might, perhaps, more properly be called communists. ... They have two distinguishing characteristics. The vast majority of them are laborers, and, as a rule, they expect the violent overthrow of existing institutions by revolution to precede the introduction of the socialistic state. I would not, by any means, say that they are all revolutionists, but the most of them undoubtedly are. ... The most general demands of the social democrats are the following: The state should exist exclusively for the laborers; land and capital must become collective property, and production be carried on unitedly. Private competition, in the ordinary sense of the term, is to cease.}}</ref> supporting [[Social:Economic interventionism|economic]] and [[Philosophy:Social interventionism|social interventions]] to promote [[Social:Social justice|social justice]].<ref>{{cite book |last1=Merkel |first1=Wolfgang |last2=Petring |first2=Alexander |last3=Henkes |first3=Christian |last4=Egle |first4=Christoph |date=2008 |title=Social Democracy in Power: The Capacity to Reform |series=Routledge Research in Comparative Politics |location=London |publisher=[[Company:Routledge|Routledge]] |isbn=978-0415438209}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |last=Heywood |first=Andrew |year=2012 |title=Political Ideologies: An Introduction |edition=5th |location=Basingstoke, England |publisher=[[Company:Palgrave Macmillan|Palgrave Macmillan]] |isbn=978-0230367258 |page=128 |quote=Social democracy is an ideological stance that supports a broad balance between market capitalism, on the one hand, and state intervention, on the other hand. Being based on a compromise between the market and the state, social democracy lacks a systematic underlying theory and is, arguably, inherently vague. It is nevertheless associated with the following views: (1) capitalism is the only reliable means of generating wealth, but it is a morally defective means of distributing wealth because of its tendency towards poverty and inequality; (2) the defects of the capitalist system can be rectified through economic and social intervention, the state being the custodian of the public interest ... .}}</ref> While retaining socialism as a long-term goal,<ref>{{harvp|Roemer|1994|pp=25–27}}: "The long term and the short term."; {{harvp|Berman|1998|p=57}}: "Over the long term, however, democratizing Sweden's political system was seen to be important not merely as a means but also as an end in itself. Achieving democracy was crucial not only because it would increase the power of the SAP in the Swedish political system but also because it was the form socialism would take once it arrived. Political, economic, and social equality went hand in hand, according to the SAP, and were all equally important characteristics of the future socialist society."; {{harvp|Busky|2000|pp=7–8}}; {{harvp|Bailey|2009|p=77}}: "... Giorgio Napolitano launched a medium-term programme, 'which tended to justify the governmental deflationary policies, and asked for the understanding of the workers, since any economic recovery would be linked with the ''long-term'' goal of an advance towards democratic socialism'"; {{harvp|Lamb|2015|p=415}}</ref> in the post-war period social democracy embraced a [[Philosophy:Mixed economy|mixed economy]] based on Keynesianism within a predominantly developed capitalist [[Finance:Market economy|market economy]] and liberal democratic polity that expands state intervention to include income redistribution, [[Finance:Regulatory economics|regulation]], and a [[Social:Welfare state|welfare state]].<ref>{{harvp|Badie|Berg-Schlosser|Morlino|2011|p=2423}}: "Social democracy refers to a political tendency resting on three fundamental features: (1) democracy (e.g., equal rights to vote and form parties), (2) an economy partly regulated by the state (e.g., through Keynesianism), and (3) a welfare state offering social support to those in need (e.g., equal rights to education, health service, employment and pensions)."</ref> [[Finance:Economic democracy|Economic democracy]] proposes a sort of market socialism, with more democratic control of companies, investments and natural resources.<ref>{{cite book |last=Smith |first=J. W. |date=2005 |title=Economic Democracy: The Political Struggle for the 21st century |location=Radford |publisher=Institute for Economic Democracy Press |isbn=1933567-015}}</ref>

The socialist [[Social:Political movement|political movement]] includes political philosophies that originated in the revolutionary movements of the mid-to-late 18th century and out of concern for the [[Social:Social issue|social problems]] that socialists associated with capitalism.{{sfnp|Lamb|Docherty|2006|p=1}} By the late 19th century, after the work of [[Biography:Karl Marx|Karl Marx]] and his collaborator [[Biography:Friedrich Engels|Friedrich Engels]], socialism had come to signify [[Social:Anti-capitalism|anti-capitalism]] and advocacy for a post-capitalist system based on some form of social ownership of the means of production.<ref>{{cite book |last=Gasper |first=Phillip |title=The Communist Manifesto: A Road Map to History's Most Important Political Document |publisher=[[Company:Haymarket Books|Haymarket Books]] |year=2005 |isbn=978-1931859257 |page=24 |quote=As the nineteenth century progressed, 'socialist' came to signify not only concern with the social question, but opposition to capitalism and support for some form of social ownership.}}</ref><ref name="Anthony Giddens 1994, p. 71">{{cite book |first=Anthony |last=Giddens |title=Beyond Left and Right: The Future of Radical Politics |edition=1998 |location=Cambridge, England, UK |publisher=Polity Press |orig-date=1994 |date=1998 |pages=71}}</ref> By the early 1920s, [[Social:Communism|communism]] and social democracy had become the two dominant political tendencies within the international socialist movement,<ref>{{harvp|Newman|2005|p=5}}: "Chapter 1 looks at the foundations of the doctrine by examining the contribution made by various traditions of socialism in the period between the early 19th century and the aftermath of the First World War. The two forms that emerged as dominant by the early 1920s were social democracy and communism."</ref> with socialism itself becoming the most influential secular movement of the 20th century.<ref>{{cite book |editor-last=Kurian |editor-first=George Thomas |date=2011 |title=The Encyclopedia of Political Science |location=Washington, D.C. |publisher=CQ Press |pages=1554}}</ref> Many socialists also adopted the causes of other social movements, such as [[Social:Socialist feminism|feminism]], [[Social:Eco-socialism|environmentalism]], and [[Philosophy:Progressivism|progressivism]].<ref>{{cite book |first=Garrett Ward |last=Sheldon |title=Encyclopedia of Political Thought |publisher=Facts on File. Inc. |date=2001 |pages=280}}</ref>

While the emergence of the [[Place:Soviet Union|Soviet Union]] as the world's first nominally [[Earth:Socialist state|socialist state]] led to socialism's widespread association with the Soviet economic model, several scholars posit that in practice, the model functioned as a form of [[Social:State capitalism|state capitalism]].<ref name="Chomsky 1986">{{cite journal |last=Chomsky |first=Noam |date=Spring–Summer 1986 |title=The Soviet Union Versus Socialism |url=https://chomsky.info/1986____/ |journal=Our Generation |access-date=10 June 2020 |via=Chomsky.info}}</ref><ref name="State Capitalism in the Soviet Union, 2001">{{cite journal |last1=Howard |first1=M. C. |last2=King |first2=J. E. |date=2001 |title=State Capitalism' in the Soviet Union |url=http://www.hetsa.org.au/pdf/34-A-08.pdf |journal=History of Economics Review |volume=34 |issue=1 |pages=110–126 |doi=10.1080/10370196.2001.11733360 |s2cid=42809979 |access-date=17 December 2015 |archive-date=28 July 2019 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190728140836/https://www.hetsa.org.au/pdf/34-A-08.pdf |url-status=dead }}</ref><ref name="Fitzgibbons 2002">{{cite web |last=Fitzgibbons |first=Daniel J. |date=11 October 2002 |title=USSR strayed from communism, say Economics professors |url=https://www.umass.edu/pubaffs/chronicle/archives/02/10-11/economics.html |access-date=22 September 2021 |website=The Campus Chronicle |publisher=[[Organization:University of Massachusetts Amherst|University of Massachusetts Amherst]]}} See also {{cite web |last=Wolff |first=Richard D. |author-link=Richard D. Wolff |date=27 June 2015 |title=Socialism Means Abolishing the Distinction Between Bosses and Employees |url=https://truthout.org/articles/socialism-means-abolishing-the-distinction-between-bosses-and-employees/ |access-date=29 January 2020 |website=Truthout |archive-date=11 March 2018 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180311070639/http://www.truth-out.org/news/item/31567-socialism-means-abolishing-the-distinction-between-bosses-and-employees |url-status=}}</ref> Several academics, political commentators, and scholars have noted that some Western European countries have been governed by socialist parties or have [[Philosophy:Mixed economy|mixed economies]] that are sometimes called "[[Social:Democratic socialism|democratic socialist]]".<ref>{{harvp|Barrett|1978}}: "If we were to extend the definition of socialism to include Labor Britain or socialist Sweden, there would be no difficulty in refuting the connection between capitalism and democracy."; {{harvp|Heilbroner|1991|pp=96–110}}; {{harvp|Kendall|2011|pp=125–127}}: "Sweden, Great Britain, and France have mixed economies, sometimes referred to as democratic socialism—an economic and political system that combines private ownership of some of the means of production, governmental distribution of some essential goods and services, and free elections. For example, government ownership in Sweden is limited primarily to railroads, mineral resources, a public bank, and liquor and tobacco operations."; {{harvp|Li|2015|pp=60–69}}: "The scholars in camp of democratic socialism believe that China should draw on the Sweden experience, which is suitable not only for the West but also for China. In the post-Mao China, the Chinese intellectuals are confronted with a variety of models. The liberals favor the American model and share the view that the Soviet model has become archaic and should be totally abandoned. Meanwhile, democratic socialism in Sweden provided an alternative model. Its sustained economic development and extensive welfare programs fascinated many. Numerous scholars within the democratic socialist camp argue that China should model itself politically and economically on Sweden, which is viewed as more genuinely socialist than China. There is a growing consensus among them that in the Nordic countries the welfare state has been extraordinarily successful in eliminating poverty."</ref><ref>{{harvp|Sanandaji|2021}}: "Nordic nations—and especially Sweden—did embrace socialism between around 1970 and 1990. During the past 30 years, however, both conservative and social democratic-led governments have moved toward the center."</ref> Following the revolutions of 1989, many of these countries have moved away from socialism as a neoliberal consensus replaced the social democratic consensus in the advanced capitalist world,<ref>{{harvp|Sanandaji|2021}}; {{harvp|Caulcutt|2022}}; {{harvp|Krause-Jackson|2019}}; {{harvp|Best|Kahn|Nocella II|McLaren|2011|p=xviii}}</ref> while many former socialist politicians and political parties embraced "[[Philosophy:Third Way|Third Way]]" politics, remaining committed to equality and welfare, while abandoning public ownership and class-based politics.<ref name=":1" /> Socialism experienced a resurgence in popularity in the 2010s, most prominently in the form of democratic socialism.<ref name=":3">{{Cite web |last=Judis |first=John B. |date=2019-11-20 |title=The Socialist Revival |url=https://americanaffairsjournal.org/2019/11/the-socialist-revival/ |access-date=2023-06-26 |website=American Affairs Journal |language=en-US}}</ref><ref>{{Cite magazine |last=Cassidy |first=John |date=2019-06-18 |title=Why Socialism Is Back |language=en-US |magazine=The New Yorker |url=https://www.newyorker.com/news/our-columnists/why-socialism-is-back |access-date=2023-06-26 |issn=0028-792X}}</ref> 

== Etymology ==
For Andrew Vincent, "[t]he word 'socialism' finds its root in the Latin {{lang|la|sociare}}, which means to combine or to share. The related, more technical term in Roman and then medieval law was {{lang|la|societas}}. This latter word could mean companionship and fellowship as well as the more legalistic idea of a consensual contract between freemen".<ref>{{cite book |first=Andrew |last=Vincent |date=2010 |title=Modern Political Ideologies |publisher=[[Company:Wiley-Blackwell|Wiley-Blackwell]] |isbn=978-1405154956 |pages=83}}</ref>

[[File:Ehrerbietige Vorstellung und Einladung an meine lieben Mitmenschen.pdf|thumb|Utopian socialist pamphlet of Rudolf Sutermeister]]
Initial use of ''socialism'' was claimed by [[Biography:Pierre Leroux|Pierre Leroux]], who alleged he first used the term in the Parisian journal {{lang|fr|Le Globe}} in 1832.<ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.etymonline.com/word/socialism |title=socialism (n.) |publisher=Online Etymology Dictionary |website=etymonline |access-date=3 May 2021}}</ref><ref name="Kołakowski2005">{{cite book |first=Leszek |last=Kołakowski |title=Main Currents of Marxism: The Founders, the Golden Age, the Breakdown |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=qUCxpznbkaoC |year=2005 |publisher=W.W. Norton & Company |isbn=978-0393-060546 |page=151 |via=[[Google Books]]}}</ref> Leroux was a follower of [[Biography:Henri de Saint-Simon|Henri de Saint-Simon]], one of the founders of what would later be labelled [[Philosophy:Utopian socialism|utopian socialism]]. Socialism contrasted with the liberal doctrine of individualism that emphasized the moral worth of the individual while stressing that people act or should act as if they are in isolation from one another. The original utopian socialists condemned this doctrine of individualism for failing to address social concerns during the [[History:Industrial Revolution|Industrial Revolution]], including poverty, oppression, and vast wealth inequality. They viewed their society as harming community life by basing society on competition. They presented socialism as an alternative to liberal individualism based on the shared ownership of resources.<ref name="Marvin Perry 1600, p. 540">{{cite book |first1=Marvin |last1=Perry |first2=Myrna |last2=Chase |first3=Margaret |last3=Jacob |first4=James R. |last4=Jacob |title=Western Civilization: Ideas, Politics, and Society – From 1600 |volume=2 |edition=Ninth |location=Boston |publisher=Houghton Mifflin Harcourt Publishing Company |date=2009 |page=540 |isbn=9781305445499 |oclc=1289795802}}</ref> Saint-Simon proposed [[Social:Economic planning|economic planning]], scientific administration and the application of scientific understanding to the organisation of society. By contrast, Robert Owen proposed to organise production and ownership via [[Finance:Cooperative|cooperative]]s.<ref name="Marvin Perry 1600, p. 540"/><ref>{{cite book |last1=Gregory |first1=Paul |last2=Stuart |first2=Robert |title=The Global Economy and its Economic Systems |publisher=South-Western College Publishing |date=2013 |isbn=978-1285-05535-0 |page=159 |quote=Socialist writers of the nineteenth century proposed socialist arrangements for sharing as a response to the inequality and poverty of the industrial revolution. English socialist Robert Owen proposed that ownership and production take place in cooperatives, where all members shared equally. French socialist Henri Saint-Simon proposed to the contrary: socialism meant solving economic problems by means of state administration and planning, and taking advantage of new advances in science.}}</ref> ''Socialism'' is also attributed in France to Marie Roch Louis Reybaud while in Britain it is attributed to Owen, who became one of the fathers of the cooperative movement.<ref>{{cite dictionary |dictionary=Oxford English Dictionary |chapter=Etymology of socialism}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |last=Russell |first=Bertrand |author-link=Bertrand Russell |date=1972 |title=A History of Western Philosophy |publisher=Touchstone |pages=781}}</ref>

The definition and usage of ''socialism'' settled by the 1860s, replacing ''associationist'', ''co-operative'', ''[[Social:Mutualism (economic theory)|mutualist]]'' and ''collectivist'' that had been used as synonyms while ''communism'' fell out of use during this period.<ref name="Williams 1983 288">{{cite book |last=Williams |first=Raymond |title=Keywords: A vocabulary of culture and society, revised edition |publisher=[[Organization:Oxford University Press|Oxford University Press]] |year=1983 |isbn=978-0195204698 |page=[https://archive.org/details/keywordsvocabula00willrich/page/288 288] |chapter=Socialism |quote=Modern usage began to settle from the 1860s, and in spite of the earlier variations and distinctions it was socialist and socialism which came through as the predominant words ... Communist, in spite of the distinction that had been made in the 1840s, was very much less used, and parties in the Marxist tradition took some variant of social and socialist as titles. |chapter-url=https://archive.org/details/keywordsvocabula00willrich/page/288}}</ref> An early distinction between ''[[Social:Communism|communism]]'' and ''socialism'' was that the latter aimed to only socialise production while the former aimed to socialise both [[Finance:Production (economics)|production]] and [[Finance:Consumption (economics)|consumption]] (in the form of free access to final goods).<ref name="Steele 1992 43">{{cite book |last=Steele |first=David |title=From Marx to Mises: Post-Capitalist Society and the Challenge of Economic Calculation |publisher=Open Court Publishing Company |year=1992 |isbn=978-0875484495 |page=43 |quote=One widespread distinction was that socialism socialised production only while communism socialised production and consumption.}}</ref> By 1888, Marxists employed ''socialism'' in place of ''communism'' as the latter had come to be considered an old-fashioned synonym for ''socialism''. It was not until after the Bolshevik Revolution that ''socialism'' was appropriated by [[Biography:Vladimir Lenin|Vladimir Lenin]] to mean a stage between [[Philosophy:Capitalism|capitalism]] and communism. He used it to defend the Bolshevik program from Marxist criticism that Russia's [[Social:Productive forces|productive forces]] were not sufficiently developed for communism.<ref name="Steele 1992 44-45">{{cite book |last=Steele |first=David |title=From Marx to Mises: Post-Capitalist Society and the Challenge of Economic Calculation |publisher=Open Court Publishing Company |year=1992 |isbn=978-0875484495 |pages=44–45 |quote=By 1888, the term 'socialism' was in general use among Marxists, who had dropped 'communism', now considered an old fashioned term meaning the same as 'socialism'. ... At the turn of the century, Marxists called themselves socialists. ... The definition of socialism and communism as successive stages was introduced into Marxist theory by Lenin in 1917. ... the new distinction was helpful to Lenin in defending his party against the traditional Marxist criticism that Russia was too backward for a socialist revolution.}}</ref> The distinction between ''communism'' and ''socialism'' became salient in 1918 after the Russian Social Democratic Labour Party renamed itself to the All-Russian Communist Party, interpreting ''communism'' specifically to mean socialists who supported the politics and theories of Bolshevism, [[Social:Leninism|Leninism]] and later that of [[Social:Marxism–Leninism|Marxism–Leninism]],<ref>{{harvp|Busky|2000|p=9}}: "In a modern sense of the word, communism refers to the ideology of Marxism–Leninism."</ref> although communist parties continued to describe themselves as socialists dedicated to socialism.<ref>{{cite book |last=Williams |first=Raymond |title=Keywords: A Vocabulary of Culture and Society |edition=revised |publisher=[[Organization:Oxford University Press|Oxford University Press]] |year=1983 |isbn=978-0195204698 |page=[https://archive.org/details/keywordsvocabula00willrich/page/289 289] |chapter=Socialism |quote=The decisive distinction between socialist and communist, as in one sense these terms are now ordinarily used, came with the renaming, in 1918, of the Russian Social-Democratic Labour Party (Bolsheviks) as the All-Russian Communist Party (Bolsheviks). From that time on, a distinction of socialist from communist, often with supporting definitions such as social democrat or democratic socialist, became widely current, although it is significant that all communist parties, in line with earlier usage, continued to describe themselves as socialist and dedicated to socialism. |chapter-url=https://archive.org/details/keywordsvocabula00willrich/page/289}}</ref> According to ''The Oxford Handbook of Karl Marx'', "Marx used many terms to refer to a post-capitalist society—positive [[Philosophy:Humanism|humanism]], socialism, communism, realm of free individuality, [[Philosophy:Free association of producers|free association of producers]], etc. He used these terms completely interchangeably. The notion that 'socialism' and 'communism' are distinct historical stages is alien to his work and only entered the lexicon of Marxism after his death".<ref name=Hudis>{{cite book |editor1-last=Hudis |editor1-first=Peter |editor2-last=Vidal |editor2-first=Matt |editor3-last=Smith |editor3-first=Tony |editor4-last=Rotta |editor4-first=Tomás |editor5-last=Prew |editor5-first=Paul |date=September 2018 – June 2019 |url=https://www.oxfordhandbooks.com/view/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780190695545.001.0001/oxfordhb-9780190695545 |title=The Oxford Handbook of Karl Marx |chapter-url=https://www.oxfordhandbooks.com/view/10.1093/oxfordhb/9780190695545.001.0001/oxfordhb-9780190695545-e-50 |chapter=Marx's Concept of Socialism |publisher=[[Organization:Oxford University Press|Oxford University Press]] |isbn=978-019-0695545 |doi=10.1093/oxfordhb/9780190695545.001.0001}}</ref>

In Christian Europe, communists were believed to have adopted [[Philosophy:Atheism|atheism]]. In Protestant England, ''communism'' was too close to the [[Organization:Catholic Church|Roman Catholic]] communion rite, hence ''socialist'' was the preferred term.<ref>{{cite book |last=Williams |first=Raymond |title=Keywords: A Vocabulary of Culture and Society |publisher=Fontana Books |year=1976 |isbn=978-0-006334798 |title-link=Keywords: A Vocabulary of Culture and Society}}</ref> Engels wrote that in 1848, when ''The Communist Manifesto'' was published, socialism was respectable in Europe while communism was not. The Owenites in England and the Fourierists in France were considered respectable socialists while working-class movements that "proclaimed the necessity of total social change" denoted themselves ''communists''.<ref>{{cite book |last=Engels |first=Friedrich |author-link=Friedrich Engels |title=Preface to the 1888 English Edition of the Communist Manifesto |orig-date=1888 |pages=202 |publisher=Penguin Books |date=2002}}</ref> This branch of socialism produced the communist work of Étienne Cabet in France and Wilhelm Weitling in Germany.<ref>{{cite book |last=Todorova |first=Maria |year=2020 |title=The Lost World of Socialists at Europe's Margins: Imagining Utopia, 1870s–1920s |edition=hardcover |location=London |publisher=Bloomsbury Academic |isbn=978-1350150331}}</ref> British moral philosopher [[Biography:John Stuart Mill|John Stuart Mill]] discussed a form of economic socialism within a liberal context that would later be known as [[Philosophy:Liberal socialism|liberal socialism]]. In later editions of his ''[[Finance:Principles of Political Economy|Principles of Political Economy]]'' (1848), Mill posited that "as far as economic theory was concerned, there is nothing in principle in economic theory that precludes an economic order based on socialist policies"<ref>{{cite encyclopedia |last=Wilson |first=Fred |chapter-url=http://plato.stanford.edu/entries/mill/ |chapter=John Stuart Mill |encyclopedia=[[Stanford Encyclopedia of Philosophy]] |year=2007 |access-date=2 August 2016}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |quote=Mill, in contrast, advances a form of liberal democratic socialism for the enlargement of freedom as well as to realise social and distributive justice. He offers a powerful account of economic injustice and justice that is centered on his understanding of freedom and its conditions. |first=Bruce |last=Baum |chapter=J. S. Mill and Liberal Socialism |editor1-first=Nadia |editor1-last=Urbanati |editor2-first=Alex |editor2-last=Zacharas |title=J.S. Mill's Political Thought: A Bicentennial Reassessment |location=Cambridge |publisher={{wipe|Cambridge University Press}} |date=2007}}</ref> and promoted substituting capitalist businesses with [[Social:Worker cooperative|worker cooperative]]s.<ref>''Principles of Political Economy with Some of Their Applications to Social Philosophy'', IV.7.21. ''John Stuart Mill: Political Economy'', IV.7.21. "The form of association, however, which if mankind continue to improve, must be expected in the end to predominate, is not that which can exist between a capitalist as chief, and work-people without a voice in the management, but the association of the labourers themselves on terms of equality, collectively owning the capital with which they carry on their operations, and working under managers elected and removable by themselves."</ref> While democrats looked to the [[Social:Revolutions of 1848|Revolutions of 1848]] as a [[Social:Democratic revolution|democratic revolution]] which in the long run ensured liberty, equality, and fraternity, Marxists denounced it as a betrayal of working-class ideals by a bourgeoisie indifferent to the [[Social:Proletariat|proletariat]].<ref>{{cite book |first=Robert |last=Gildea |chapter=1848 in European Collective Memory |editor1-last=Evans |editor2-last=Strandmann |title=The Revolutions in Europe, 1848–1849 |pages=207–235}}</ref>

== History ==
{{main|Social:History of socialism}}

=== Early socialism ===
[[File:Hw-fourier.jpg|thumb|upright|Charles Fourier, influential early French socialist thinker]]
Socialist models and ideas espousing common or public ownership have existed since antiquity. The economy of the 3rd century BCE Mauryan Empire of India, an absolute monarchy, has been described by some scholars as "a socialized monarchy" and "a sort of state socialism" due to "nationalisation of industries".<ref>{{cite book |title=The First Great Political Realist: Kautilya and His Arthashastra |page=67 |first=Roger |last=Boesche |year=2003 |publisher=Lexington Books |isbn=978-07391-06075 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=K85NA7Rg67wC&pg=PA67 |via=[[Google Books]]}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |title=Chandragupta Maurya and His Times |first=Radhakumud |last=Mookerji |author-link=Radha Kumud Mukherjee |page=102 |publisher=Motilal Banarsidass |quote=Kautiliya polity was based on a considerable amount of socialism and nationalisation of industries.}}</ref> Other scholars have suggested that elements of socialist thought were present in the politics of classical [[Philosophy:Ancient Greek philosophy|Greek philosophers]] [[Biography:Plato|Plato]]<ref>{{cite book |first=A.E. |last=Taylor |author-link=Alfred Edward Taylor |title=Plato: The Man and His Work |publisher=Dover |date=2001 |pages=276–277}}</ref> and [[Biography:Aristotle|Aristotle]].<ref>{{cite book |first=W. D. |last=Ross |author-link=W. D. Ross |title=Aristotle |edition=6 |pages=257}}</ref> [[Biography:Mazdak|Mazdak the Younger]] (died {{Circa|524 or 528 CE}}), a Persian communal proto-socialist,<ref>{{cite book |title=A Short History of the World |publisher=Progress Publishers |location=Moscow |date=1974}}</ref> instituted communal possessions and advocated the public good. Abu Dharr al-Ghifari, a [[Religion:Companions of the Prophet|Companion]] of [[Biography:Muhammad|Muhammad]], is credited by multiple authors as a principal antecedent of [[Religion:Islamic socialism|Islamic socialism]].<ref>{{harvp|Esposito|1995|p=[https://archive.org/details/oxfordencycloped01espo/page/19 19]}}; {{harvp|Oxford Islamic Studies Online}}; {{harvp|Hanna|Gardner|1969|pp=273–274}}; {{harvp|Hanna|1969|pp=275–286}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |title=And Once Again Abu Dharr |url=http://www.iranchamber.com/personalities/ashariati/works/once_again_abu_dhar1.php |access-date=15 August 2011}}</ref> The teachings of Jesus are frequently described as socialist, especially by [[Social:Christian socialism|Christian socialists]].<ref>{{cite book |last=Eagleton |first=Terry |author-link=Terry Eagleton |editor-last=Fraser |editor-first=Giles |year=2007 |title=The Gospels: Jesus Christ |publisher=Verso Books |isbn=9781844671762}}</ref> However, both socialists and non-socialists have disputed claims of Jesus being a socialist.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Salter |first=Alexander William |date=21 April 2022 |title=Opinion {{!}} Jesus a Socialist? That's a Myth |url=https://www.wsj.com/articles/the-myth-of-jesus-socialism-acts-new-testament-christianity-catholic-protestant-marx-communism-st-paul-11650575604 |access-date=15 June 2023 |website={{wipe|The Wall Street Journal}} |language=en-US}}</ref><ref>{{Cite news |last=Walden |first=Daniel |date=5 September 2020 |title=Was Jesus A Socialist? |language=en |work=Current Affairs |url=https://www.currentaffairs.org/2020/09/was-jesus-a-socialist |access-date=15 June 2023 |issn=2471-2647}}</ref> In the Bible, Acts 4:32–35 records that the first [[Religion:Jewish Christian|Jewish Christian]] communities were organized along the principles of [[Social:Common ownership|common ownership]] and [[Philosophy:Redistribution of income and wealth|redistribution]] of goods,<ref>{{Bibleverse|Acts|4:32–35}}: "<sup>32</sup>Now the whole group of those who believed were of one heart and soul, and no one claimed private ownership of any possessions, but everything they owned was held in common. <sup>33</sup>With great power the apostles gave their testimony to the resurrection of the Lord Jesus, and great grace was upon them all. <sup>34</sup>There was not a needy person among them, for as many as owned lands or houses sold them and brought the proceeds of what was sold. <sup>35</sup>They laid it at the apostles' feet, and it was distributed to each as any had need."</ref> although the pattern soon disappears from [[Religion:Church history|church history]] except within [[Philosophy:Monasticism|monasticism]]. Christian socialism was one of the founding threads of the British Labour Party and is claimed to begin with the uprising of Wat Tyler and John Ball in the 14th century CE.<ref>{{cite news |first=Paul |last=Routledge |url=https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/labour-revives-faith-in-christian-socialism-1437750.html |title=Labour revives faith in Christian Socialism |work=The Independent |date=21 May 1994 |access-date=1 July 2018 |archive-date=1 July 2018 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180701202424/https://www.independent.co.uk/news/uk/home-news/labour-revives-faith-in-christian-socialism-1437750.html}}</ref> After the {{wipe|French Revolution}}, activists and theorists such as François-Noël Babeuf, [[History:Étienne-Gabriel Morelly|Étienne-Gabriel Morelly]], Philippe Buonarroti and Auguste Blanqui influenced the early French labour and socialist movements.<ref name="George Thomas Kurian 2011">{{cite book |editor-first=Thomas |editor-last=Kurian |title=The Encyclopedia of Political Science |publisher=CQ Press |location=Washington D.C. |date=2011 |page=1555}}</ref> In Britain, [[Biography:Thomas Paine|Thomas Paine]] proposed a detailed plan to tax property owners to pay for the needs of the poor in ''Agrarian Justice''<ref>{{cite book |last=Paine |first=Thomas |author-link=Thomas Paine |date=2004 |title=Common sense [with] Agrarian justice |publisher=Penguin Books |isbn=0141018909 |pages=92–93}}</ref> while [[Biography:Charles Hall (economist)|Charles Hall]] wrote ''The Effects of Civilization on the People in European States'', denouncing capitalism's effects on the poor of his time.<ref name="Blaug 1986 358">{{cite book |last=Blaug |first=Mark |title=Who's Who in Economics: A Biographical Dictionary of Major Economists 1700–1986 |publisher=The MIT Press |year=1986 |isbn=978-0262-022569 |page=358}}</ref> This work influenced the utopian schemes of Thomas Spence.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Bonnett |first1=Alastair |year=2007 |title=The Other Rights of Man: The Revolutionary Plan of Thomas Spence |journal=History Today |volume=57 |issue=9 |pages=42–48}}</ref>

The first self-conscious socialist movements developed in the 1820s and 1830s. Groups such as the [[Philosophy:Fourierism|Fourierists]], [[Philosophy:Owenism|Owenites]] and [[Social:Saint-Simonianism|Saint-Simonians]] provided a series of analyses and interpretations of society. Especially the Owenites overlapped with other working-class movements such as the [[Social:Chartism|Chartists]] in the United Kingdom.<ref>{{cite book |first=Andrew |last=Vincent |title=Modern political ideologies |publisher=[[Company:Wiley-Blackwell|Wiley-Blackwell]] |date=2010 |page=88}}</ref> This was also the first time that the term ''socialism'' itself applies in a fashion recognisably similar to its modern meaning; the word was first used in 1827 in the ''London Cooperative Magazine'' in the UK and later in 1832 in the French periodical ''Le Globe''.<ref>{{Cite book |last=Jitendra |first=Uttam |title=Encyclopedia of Politics: The Left |publisher=SAGE Publications |year=2005 |isbn=1412904099 |editor-last=Carlisle |editor-first=Rodney P. |pages=399–403 |chapter=Socialism}}</ref> An earlier usage of the word ''socialism'' appears in the Italian language in 1803, but not with the modern meaning of the term.<ref>{{Cite book |last=Cole |first=G. D. H. |title=Socialist Thought: The Forerunners |publisher=Macmillan & Co |year=1953 |pages=1}}</ref>

The Chartists gathered significant numbers around the People's Charter of 1838 which sought democratic reforms focused on the extension of suffrage to all male adults. Leaders in the movement called for a more equitable distribution of income and better living conditions for the working classes. The first trade unions and consumer cooperative societies followed the Chartist movement.{{sfnp|Brandal|Bratberg|Thorsen|2013|p=20}} [[Biography:Pierre-Joseph Proudhon|Pierre-Joseph Proudhon]] proposed his philosophy of [[Social:Mutualism (economic theory)|mutualism]] in which "everyone had an equal claim, either alone or as part of a small cooperative, to possess and use land and other resources as needed to make a living".<ref name=":1">{{cite web |url=http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/551569/socialism |title=socialism |website=Encyclopedia Britannica |date=29 May 2023}}</ref> Other currents inspired [[Social:Christian socialism|Christian socialism]] "often in Britain and then usually coming out of left liberal politics and a romantic anti-industrialism"<ref name="George Thomas Kurian 2011" /> which produced theorists such as Edward Bellamy, Charles Kingsley and Frederick Denison Maurice.<ref name="ReferenceC">{{cite encyclopedia |url=http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/551569/socialism |title=Socialism |encyclopedia=Encyclopedia Britannica Online |date=29 May 2023 |quote=The origins of socialism as a political movement lie in the Industrial Revolution.}}</ref>

The first advocates of socialism favoured social levelling in order to create a meritocratic or technocratic society based on individual talent.<ref name="fsmitha.com">{{cite web |url=http://www.fsmitha.com/h3/h44-ph.html |title=Adam Smith |publisher=Fsmitha.com |access-date=2 June 2010}}</ref> [[Biography:Henri de Saint-Simon|Henri de Saint-Simon]] was fascinated by the potential of science and technology and advocated a socialist society that would eliminate the disorderly aspects of capitalism based on equal opportunities.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.anu.edu.au/polsci/marx/contemp/pamsetc/socfrombel/sfb_2.htm |title=2: Birth of the Socialist Idea |publisher=Anu.edu.au |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20060807055202/http://www.anu.edu.au/polsci/marx/contemp/pamsetc/socfrombel/sfb_2.htm |archive-date=7 August 2006 |access-date=2 June 2010 |url-status=live}}</ref>{{unreliable source?|date=December 2011}} He sought a society in which each person was ranked according to his or her capacities and rewarded according to his or her work.<ref name="fsmitha.com"/> His key focus was on administrative efficiency and industrialism and a belief that science was essential to progress.{{sfnp|Newman|2005}} This was accompanied by a desire for a rationally organised economy based on planning and geared towards large-scale scientific and material progress.<ref name="fsmitha.com"/>

West European social critics, including Louis Blanc, [[Biography:Charles Fourier|Charles Fourier]], Charles Hall, Robert Owen, Pierre-Joseph Proudhon and Saint-Simon were the first modern socialists who criticised the poverty and inequality of the [[History:Industrial Revolution|Industrial Revolution]]. They advocated reform, Owen advocating the transformation of society to small communities without [[Finance:Private property|private property]]. Owen's contribution to modern socialism was his claim that individual actions and characteristics were largely determined by their social environment.{{sfnp|Newman|2005}} On the other hand, Fourier advocated Phalanstères (communities that respected individual desires, including sexual preferences), affinities and creativity and saw that work has to be made enjoyable for people.<ref>{{cite book |quote=In Fourier's system of Harmony all creative activity including industry, craft, agriculture, etc. will arise from liberated passion—this is the famous theory of "attractive labour." Fourier sexualises work itself—the life of the Phalanstery is a continual orgy of intense feeling, intellection, & activity, a society of lovers & wild enthusiasts....The Harmonian does not live with some 1600 people under one roof because of compulsion or altruism, but because of the sheer pleasure of all the social, sexual, economic, "gastrosophic," cultural, & creative relations this association allows & encourages. |url=https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/hakim-bey-the-lemonade-ocean-modern-times |title=The Lemonade Ocean & Modern Times A Position Paper |last=Bey |first=Hakim |}}</ref> Owen and Fourier's ideas were practiced in intentional communities around Europe and North America in the mid-19th century.

==== Paris Commune ====
[[File:Commune 28 mars.jpeg|thumb|left|The celebration of the election of the Commune on 28 March 1871—the Paris Commune was a major early implementation of socialist ideas.]]
The Paris Commune was a government that ruled Paris from 18 March (formally, from 28 March) to 28 May 1871. The Commune was the result of an uprising in Paris after France was defeated in the Franco-Prussian War. The Commune elections were held on 26 March. They elected a Commune council of 92 members, one member for each 20,000 residents.<ref>{{cite book |last=Rougerie |first=Jacques |title=La Commune de Paris |year=2014 |language=fr |trans-title=The Paris Commune |location=Paris |publisher=Presses Universitaires de France |isbn=978-213-0620785}}</ref>

Because the Commune was able to meet on fewer than 60 days in total, only a few decrees were actually implemented. These included the [[Religion:Separation of church and state|separation of church and state]]; the remission of rents owed for the period of the siege (during which payment had been suspended); the abolition of [[Chemistry:Shift work|night work]] in the hundreds of Paris bakeries; the granting of pensions to the unmarried companions and children of National Guards killed on active service; and the free return of all workmen's tools and household items valued up to 20 francs that had been pledged during the siege.<ref name="Milza, Pierre, La Commune">{{cite book |last=Milza |first=Pierre |title=La Commune |language=fr |trans-title=The Commune}}</ref>

=== First International ===
{{main|Organization:International Workingmen's Association}}
[[File:Bakunin speaking.png|thumb|upright|Mikhail Bakunin speaking to members of the International Workingmen's Association at the Basel Congress in 1869]]
[[File:Karl Marx crop.jpg|thumb|Karl Marx in 1875|255x255px]]
In 1864, the First International was founded in London. It united diverse revolutionary currents, including socialists such as the French followers of Proudhon,<ref>{{cite book |last=Blin |first=Arnaud |title=The History of Terrorism |publisher=University of California Press |location=Berkeley |year=2007 |isbn=978-0520247093 |page=[https://archive.org/details/historyofterrori00grar/page/116 116] |url=https://archive.org/details/historyofterrori00grar/page/116}}</ref> [[Social:Blanquism|Blanquists]], Philadelphes, English trade unionists and social democrats. In 1865 and 1866, it held a preliminary conference and had its first congress in [[Place:Geneva|Geneva]], respectively. Due to their wide variety of philosophies, conflict immediately erupted. The first objections to Marx came from the mutualists who opposed [[Philosophy:State socialism|state socialism]]. Shortly after [[Biography:Mikhail Bakunin|Mikhail Bakunin]] and his followers joined in 1868, the First International became polarised into camps headed by Marx and Bakunin.<ref>{{harvp|Woodcock|1962|p=243}}: "It is unnecessary to repeat the accounts of the Geneva and Hague Congresses of the International in which the issues between Marx and Bakunin were fought out and the organisation itself split apart into the dying Marxist rump centered around the New York General Council and the anti-authoritarian majority centred around the Bakuninist Jura Federation. But it is desirable to consider some of the factors underlying the final emergence of a predominantly anarchist International in 1872."</ref> The clearest differences between the groups emerged over their proposed strategies for achieving their visions. The First International became the first major international forum for the promulgation of socialist ideas.

Bakunin's followers were called [[Social:Collectivist anarchism|collectivists]] and sought to collectivise ownership of the means of production while retaining payment proportional to the amount and kind of labour of each individual. Like Proudhonists, they asserted the right of each individual to the product of his labour and to be remunerated for his particular contribution to production. By contrast, anarcho-communists sought collective ownership of both the means and the products of labour. As Errico Malatesta put it, "instead of running the risk of making a confusion in trying to distinguish what you and I each do, let us all work and put everything in common. In this way each will give to society all that his strength permits until enough is produced for every one; and each will take all that he needs, limiting his needs only in those things of which there is not yet plenty for every one".<ref name="dwardmac.pitzer.edu">{{cite web |title=A Talk About Anarchist Communism Between Two Workers |first=Errico |last=Malatesta |url=http://dwardmac.pitzer.edu/anarchist_Archives/malatesta/MalatestaATAC.html |website=Anarchy Archives |access-date=14 April 2016 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100110015525/http://dwardmac.pitzer.edu/anarchist_archives/malatesta/MalatestaATAC.html |archive-date=10 January 2010}}</ref> Anarcho-communism as a coherent economic-political philosophy was first formulated in the Italian section of the First International by Malatesta, Carlo Cafiero, Emilio Covelli, Andrea Costa and other ex-[[Biography:Giuseppe Mazzini|Mazzinian]] republicans.<ref name="Nunzio Pernicious pp. 111-113">{{cite book |first=Nunzio |last=Pernicone |title=Italian Anarchism 1864–1892 |pages=111–113 |publisher=AK Press |date=2009}}</ref> Out of respect for Bakunin, they did not make their differences with collectivist anarchism explicit until after his death.<ref name="marxists.org">{{cite book |first=James |last=Guillaume |author-link=James Guillaume |chapter-url=http://www.marxists.org/reference/archive/guillaume/works/bakunin.htm |chapter=Michael Bakunin – A Biographical Sketch |title=Bakunin on Anarchy |editor-first=Sam |editor-last=Dolgoff |translator-first=Sam |translator-last=Dolgoff |translator-link=Sam Dolgoff |orig-date=1907 |date=1971 |via=Marxists Internet Archive}}</ref>

[[Social:Syndicalism|Syndicalism]] emerged in France inspired in part by Proudhon and later by Pelloutier and [[Biography:Georges Sorel|Georges Sorel]].<ref name="ReferenceB">{{cite web |url=http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/551569/socialism |title=Socialism |website=Encyclopedia Britannica |date=29 May 2023}}</ref> It developed at the end of the 19th century out of the French trade-union movement (''syndicat'' is the French word for trade union). It was a significant force in Italy and Spain in the early 20th century until it was crushed by the fascist regimes in those countries. In the United States, syndicalism appeared in the guise of the [[Social:Industrial Workers of the World|Industrial Workers of the World]], or "Wobblies", founded in 1905.<ref name="ReferenceB"/> Syndicalism is an [[Finance:Economic system|economic system]] that organises industries into confederations (syndicates)<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/syndicalism |title=Syndicalism – Definition and More from the Free Merriam-Webster Dictionary |website=merriam-webster.com}}</ref> and the economy is managed by negotiation between specialists and worker representatives of each field, comprising multiple non-competitive categorised units.<ref>{{cite book |last=Wiarda |first=Howard J. |title=Corporatism and comparative politics |publisher=[[Company:M. E. Sharpe|M. E. Sharpe]] |date=1996 |pages=65–66, 156}}</ref> Syndicalism is a form of communism and economic [[Social:Corporatism|corporatism]], but also refers to the political movement and tactics used to bring about this type of system. An influential anarchist movement based on syndicalist ideas is [[Social:Anarcho-syndicalism|anarcho-syndicalism]].<ref>{{cite book |last=Rocker |first=Rudolf |title=Anarcho-Syndicalism: Theory and Practice |publisher=AK Press |date=2004 |pages=73}}</ref> The International Workers Association is an international anarcho-syndicalist federation of various labour unions.

The Fabian Society is a British socialist organisation established to advance socialism via [[Earth:Gradualism|gradualist]] and [[Social:Reformism|reformist]] means.<ref name=gt76>{{cite book |last=Cole |first=Margaret |title=The Story of Fabian Socialism |publisher=Stanford University Press |isbn=978-08047-00917 |year=1961 |url=https://archive.org/details/storyoffabiansoc0000cole}}</ref> The society laid many foundations of the Labour Party and subsequently affected the policies of states emerging from the decolonisation of the [[Place:British Empire|British Empire]], most notably India and Singapore. Originally, the Fabian Society was committed to the establishment of a socialist economy, alongside a commitment to British imperialism as a progressive and modernising force.<ref name="Discovering Imperialism: Social Democracy to World War I, p. 249">{{cite book |title=Discovering Imperialism: Social Democracy to World War I |date=25 November 2011 |page=249 |quote=the pro-imperialist majority, led by Sidney Webb and George Bernard Shaw, advanced an intellectual justification for central control by the British Empire, arguing that existing institutions should simply work more 'efficiently'.}}</ref> Later, the society functioned primarily as a think tank and is one of fifteen socialist societies affiliated with the Labour Party. Similar societies exist in Australia (the Australian Fabian Society), in Canada (the Douglas-Coldwell Foundation and the now disbanded League for Social Reconstruction) and in New Zealand.

[[Social:Guild socialism|Guild socialism]] is a political movement advocating [[Social:Workers' control|workers' control]] of industry through the medium of trade-related guilds "in an implied contractual relationship with the public".<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/248652/Guild-Socialism |title=Guild Socialism |website=Encyclopedia Britannica|date=8 June 2023 }}</ref> It originated in the United Kingdom and was at its most influential in the first quarter of the 20th century. Inspired by medieval guilds, theorists such as Samuel George Hobson and G. D. H. Cole advocated the public ownership of industries and their workforces' organisation into guilds, each of which under the democratic control of its trade union. Guild socialists were less inclined than Fabians to invest power in a state.<ref name="ReferenceB"/> At some point, like the American Knights of Labor, guild socialism wanted to abolish the wage system.<ref name="auto1">{{cite journal |last=Hewes |first=Amy |date=1922 |title=Guild Socialism: A Two Years' Test |journal=[[Finance:The American Economic Review|The American Economic Review]] |volume=12 |issue=2 |pages=209–237 |jstor=1802623 |issn=0002-8282}}</ref>

=== Second International ===
{{main|Organization:Second International}}
As the ideas of Marx and Engels gained acceptance, particularly in central Europe, socialists sought to unite in an international organisation. In 1889 (the centennial of the French Revolution), the Second International was founded, with 384 delegates from twenty countries representing about 300 labour and socialist organisations.<ref>{{cite web |title=Second (Socialist) International (1889–1923) organizational history 
|work=Marxists Internet Archive |access-date=11 October 2021 |url=http://www.marxisthistory.org/subject/usa/eam/secondinternational.html}}</ref> Engels was elected honorary president at the third congress in 1893. Anarchists were banned, mainly due to pressure from Marxists.{{sfnp|Woodcock|1962|pp=263–264}} It has been argued that at some point the Second International turned "into a battleground over the issue of [[Philosophy:Libertarian socialism|libertarian]] versus [[Social:Authoritarian socialism|authoritarian socialism]]. Not only did they effectively present themselves as champions of minority rights; they also provoked the German Marxists into demonstrating a dictatorial intolerance which was a factor in preventing the British labour movement from following the Marxist direction indicated by such leaders as H. M. Hyndman".{{sfnp|Woodcock|1962|pp=263–264}}

Reformism arose as an alternative to revolution. [[Biography:Eduard Bernstein|Eduard Bernstein]] was a leading social democrat in Germany who proposed the concept of evolutionary socialism. Revolutionary socialists quickly targeted reformism: [[Biography:Rosa Luxemburg|Rosa Luxemburg]] condemned Bernstein's ''Evolutionary Socialism'' in her 1900 essay ''Social Reform or Revolution?'' [[Social:Revolutionary socialism|Revolutionary socialism]] encompasses multiple social and political movements that may define "revolution" differently. The Social Democratic Party of Germany (SPD) became the largest and most powerful socialist party in Europe, despite working illegally until the anti-socialist laws were dropped in 1890. In the 1893 elections, it gained 1,787,000 votes, a quarter of the total votes cast, according to Engels. In 1895, the year of his death, Engels emphasised ''The Communist Manifesto''{{'s}} emphasis on winning, as a first step, the "battle of democracy".<ref>Marx, Engels, ''Communist Manifesto'', Selected Works, p. 52</ref>

In South America, the Socialist Party of Argentina was established in the 1890s led by Juan B. Justo and Nicolás Repetto, among others. It was the first [[Social:Political party#Types of political parties|mass party]] in the country and in Latin America. The party affiliated itself with the Second International.<ref>{{cite book |last=Rubio |first=José Luis |title=Las internacionales obreras en América |language=es |trans-title=The international workers in America |location=[[Place:Madrid|Madrid]] |publisher=Graficas Reunidas |date=1971 |page=49}}</ref>

=== Early 20th century ===
For four months in 1904, Australian Labor Party leader Chris Watson was the Prime Minister of the country. Watson thus became the head of the world's first socialist or social democratic parliamentary government.<ref>{{cite web |url=https://moadoph.gov.au/blog/a-perfect-picture-of-the-statesman-john-christian-watson/ |title=A perfect picture of the statesman: John Christian Watson |last=Rhodes |first=Campbell |publisher=Museum of Australian Democracy |date=30 April 2013 |access-date=1 March 2020}}</ref> Australian historian Geoffrey Blainey argues that the Labor Party was not socialist at all in the 1890s, and that socialist and collectivist elements only made their way in the party's platform in the early 20th century.<ref>{{cite book |last=Blainey |first=Geoffrey |url=https://archive.org/details/shorterhistoryof0000blai/page/263 |title=A shorter history of Australia |publisher=Vintage Books |year=2000 |isbn=174051033X |location=Milsons Point, N.S.W. |pages=125–126 |}}</ref>

In 1909, the first [[Social:Kibbutz|Kibbutz]] was established in Palestine<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.jpost.com/Jerusalem-Report/Adult-Children-of-the-Dream |title=Adult Children of the Dream |website=The Jerusalem Post – JPost.com|date=5 June 2010 }}</ref> by Russian Jewish Immigrants. The Kibbutz Movement expanded through the 20th century following a doctrine of [[Social:Zionism|Zionist]] socialism.<ref>{{cite book |first=James C. |last=Docherty |title=Historical dictionary of socialism |publisher=The Scarecrow Press Inc. |location=London |date=1997 |page=144}}</ref> The British Labour Party first won seats in the House of Commons in 1902.

[[File:Gramsci.png|thumb|upright|[[Biography:Antonio Gramsci|Antonio Gramsci]], member of the Italian Socialist Party and later leader and theorist of the Communist Party of Italy]]
By 1917, the patriotism of [[Social:World War I|World War I]] changed into [[Philosophy:Political radicalism|political radicalism]] in Australia, most of Europe and the United States. Other socialist parties from around the world who were beginning to gain importance in their national politics in the early 20th century included the Italian Socialist Party, the French Section of the Workers' International, the Spanish Socialist Workers' Party, the Swedish Social Democratic Party, the Russian Social Democratic Labour Party and the Socialist Party in Argentina, the Socialist Workers' Party in Chile and the [[Biography:Socialist Party of America|Socialist Party of America]] in the United States.

==== Russian Revolution ====

In February 1917, a revolution occurred in Russia. Workers, soldiers and peasants established soviets (councils), the monarchy fell and a provisional government convened pending the election of a constituent assembly. In April of that year, [[Biography:Vladimir Lenin|Vladimir Lenin]], leader of the Bolshevik faction of socialists in Russia and known for his [[Social:Leninism|profound and controversial expansions]] of [[Philosophy:Marxism|Marxism]], was allowed to cross Germany to return from exile in Switzerland.

Lenin had published essays on his analysis of [[Social:Leninism#Imperialism|imperialism]], the monopoly and globalisation phase of capitalism, as well as analyses on social conditions. He observed that as capitalism had further developed in Europe and America, the workers remained unable to gain [[Philosophy:Class consciousness|class consciousness]] so long as they were too busy working to pay their expenses. He therefore proposed that the social revolution would require the leadership of a vanguard party of class-conscious revolutionaries from the educated and politically active part of the population.<ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.pbs.org/wgbh/commandingheights/shared/minitextlo/ess_leninscritique.html |title=Commanding Heights: Lenin's Critique of Global Capitalism |first1=David N. |last1=Balaam |first2=Michael |last2=Veseth |publisher=PBS |date=2001 |access-date=30 November 2010}}</ref>

Upon arriving in Petrograd, Lenin declared that the revolution in Russia had only begun, and that the next step was for the workers' soviets to take full authority. He issued a thesis outlining the Bolshevik programme, including rejection of any legitimacy in the provisional government and advocacy for state power to be administered through the soviets. The Bolsheviks became the most influential force. On 7 November, the capitol of the provisional government was stormed by Bolshevik Red Guards in what later was officially known in the Soviet Union as the Great October Socialist Revolution. The provisional government ended and the Russian Socialist Federative Soviet Republic—the world's first constitutionally socialist state—was established. On 25 January 1918, Lenin declared "Long live the world socialist revolution!" at the Petrograd Soviet<ref>{{cite book |last=Lenin |first=Vladimir |chapter=Meeting of the Petrograd Soviet of workers and soldiers' deputies 25 January 1918 |title=Collected Works |volume=26 |page=239 |publisher=Lawrence & Wishart |date=1964}}</ref> and proposed an immediate armistice on all fronts and transferred the land of the landed proprietors, the crown and the monasteries to the peasant committees without compensation.<ref>{{cite book |last=Lenin |first=Vladimir |author-link=Vladimir Lenin |chapter=To workers Soldiers and Peasants |title=Collected Works |volume=26 |page=247 |publisher=Lawrence & Wishart |date=1964}}</ref>

{{multiple image
 | align = right
 | total_width = 300
 | image1 = Lenin in 1920 (cropped).jpg
 | caption1 = [[Biography:Vladimir Lenin|Vladimir Lenin]], founder of the [[Place:Soviet Union|Soviet Union]] and the leader of the Bolshevik party.
 | image2 = Bundesarchiv Bild 183-R15068, Leo Dawidowitsch Trotzki.jpg
 | caption2 = [[Biography:Leon Trotsky|Leon Trotsky]], founder of the Red Army and a key figure in the October Revolution.
}}

The day after assuming executive power on 25 January, Lenin wrote ''Draft Regulations on Workers' Control'', which granted workers control of businesses with more than five workers and office employees and access to all books, documents and stocks and whose decisions were to be "binding upon the owners of the enterprises".<ref>{{cite book |last=Lenin |first=Vladimir |title=Collected Works |volume=26 |pages=264–265 |publisher=Lawrence & Wishart |date=1964}}</ref> Governing through the elected soviets and in alliance with the peasant-based Left Socialist-Revolutionaries, the Bolshevik government began nationalising banks and industry; and disavowed the national debts of the deposed Romanov royal régime. It sued for peace, withdrawing from World War I and convoked a Constituent Assembly in which the peasant Socialist-Revolutionary Party (SR) won a majority.<ref>{{cite web |last=Caplan |first=Brian |title=Lenin and the First Communist Revolutions, IV |publisher=[[Organization:George Mason University|George Mason University]] |url=http://www.gmu.edu/departments/economics/bcaplan/museum/his1d.htm |access-date=14 February 2008}} <!--Strictly, the Right Socialist Revolutionaries won whereas the Left Socialist Revolutionaries were in alliance with the Bolsheviks.--></ref> Lenin's government also instituted a number of progressive measures such as universal education, universal healthcare and equal rights for women.<ref>{{cite book |last1=Adams |first1=Katherine H. |last2=Keene |first2=Michael L. |title=After the Vote Was Won: The Later Achievements of Fifteen Suffragists |date=10 January 2014 |publisher=McFarland |isbn=978-0-7864-5647-5 |page=109 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=oyaxYvSG6gAC&dq=lenin+universal+literacy+after+the+vote+was+won&pg=PA109 |language=en}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |last1=Ugri͡umov |first1=Aleksandr Leontʹevich |title=Lenin's Plan for Building Socialism in the USSR, 1917–1925 |date=1976 |publisher=Novosti Press Agency Publishing House |page=48 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=gXknAQAAMAAJ&q=lenin+universal+literacy |language=en}}</ref>

The Constituent Assembly elected SR leader Victor Chernov President of a Russian republic, but rejected the Bolshevik proposal that it endorse the Soviet decrees on land, peace and workers' control and acknowledge the power of the Soviets of Workers', Soldiers' and Peasants' Deputies. The next day, the Bolsheviks declared that the assembly was elected on outdated party lists<ref>{{cite book |last=Lenin |first=Vladimir |chapter=Declaration of the RSDLP (Bolsheviks) group at the Constituent Assembly meeting 5 January 1918 |title=Collected Works |volume=26 |page=429 |publisher=Lawrence & Wishart |date=1964}}</ref> and the All-Russian Central Executive Committee of the Soviets dissolved it.<ref>{{cite book |last=Lenin |first=Vladimir |author-link=Vladimir Lenin |chapter=Draft Decree on the Dissolution of the Constituent Assembly |title=Collected Works |volume=26 |page=434 |publisher=Lawrence & Wishart |date=1964}}</ref><ref>{{Cite book |last=Payne |first=Robert |author-link=Robert Payne (author) |title=The Life and Death of Lenin |publisher=Grafton |pages=425–440}}</ref> In March 1919, world communist parties formed Comintern (also known as the Third International) at a meeting in Moscow.{{sfnp|Lamb|Docherty|2006|p=77}}

In the [[History:Interwar period|interwar period]], Soviet Union experienced two major famines.{{undue weight inline|date=September 2021}} The First famine occurred in 1921–1922 with death estimates varying between 1 and 10 million dead. It was caused by a combination of factors – severe drought and failed harvests, continuous war since 1914, forced collectivisation of farms and requisition of grain and seed from peasants (preventing the sowing of crops) by the Soviet authorities, and an economic blockade of the Soviet Union by the Allies. The experience with the famine led Lenin to replace war communism with the New Economic Policy (NEP) in 1921 to alleviate the extreme shortages.<ref>{{cite web |url=https://warwick.ac.uk/services/library/mrc/archives_online/digital/russia/famine/ |title=Famine in Russia, 1921–1922 |website=Warwick University: Modern Records Centre |access-date=27 September 2021}}</ref> Under the NEP, private ownership was allowed for small and medium-sized enterprises. While large industry remained state controlled.

A second major famine occurred in 1930–1933, resulting in millions of deaths.

The Soviet economy was the modern world's first centrally planned economy. It adopted state ownership of industry managed through [[Social:Gosplan|Gosplan]] (the State Planning Commission), Gosbank (the State Bank) and the [[Finance:Gossnab|Gossnab]] (State Commission for Materials and Equipment Supply). Economic planning was conducted through serial Five-Year Plans. The emphasis was on development of heavy industry at expense of agriculture. Rapid industrialization served two purposes: to bring largely agrarian societies into the modern age, and to establish a politically loyal working class. Modernization brought about a general increase in the standard of living in the 1950s and 60's.<ref>{{cite book |last=Ther |first=Philipp |date=2016 |title=Europe since 1989: A History |url=https://press.princeton.edu/titles/10812.html |publisher=Princeton University Press |page=132 |isbn=978-0691167374 |quote=Stalinist regimes aimed to catapult the predominantly agrarian societies into the modern age by swift industrialization. At the same time, they hoped to produce politically loyal working classes by mass employment in large state industries. Steelworks were built in Eisenhüttenstadt (GDR), Nowa Huta (Poland), Košice (Slovakia), and Miskolc (Hungary), as were various mechanical engineering and chemical combines and other industrial sites. As a result of communist modernization, living standards in Eastern Europe rose. Planned economies, moreover, meant that wages, salaries, and the prices of consumer goods were fixed. Although the communists were not able to cancel out all regional differences, they succeeded in creating largely egalitarian societies.}}</ref>

==== Third International and the revolutionary wave ====
{{main|Organization:Communist International|Social:Revolutions of 1917–1923}}
[[File:Rosa Luxemburg.jpg|thumb|upright|Rosa Luxemburg, prominent Marxist revolutionary and martyr of the German Spartacist uprising in 1919]]
The Bolshevik Russian Revolution of January 1918 launched Communist parties in many countries and a wave of revolutions until the mid-1920s. Few communists doubted that the Russian experience depended on successful, working-class socialist revolutions in developed capitalist countries.<ref>{{cite book |last=Bertil |first=Hessel |chapter=Introduction |title=Theses, Resolutions and Manifestos of the first four congresses of the Third International |page=xiii |publisher=Ink Links |date=1980}}</ref><ref>"We have always proclaimed, and repeated, this elementary truth of Marxism, that the victory of socialism requires the joint efforts of workers in a number of advanced countries." Lenin, ''Sochineniya'' (Works), 5th ed. Vol. XLIV, p. 418, February 1922. (Quoted by Mosche Lewin in ''Lenin's Last Struggle'', p. 4. Pluto (1975))</ref> In 1919, Lenin and [[Biography:Leon Trotsky|Leon Trotsky]] organised the world's Communist parties into an international association of workers—the Communist International (Comintern), also called the Third International.

The Russian Revolution influenced uprisings in other countries. The German Revolution of 1918–1919 replaced Germany's imperial government with a republic. The revolution lasted from November 1918 until the establishment of the Weimar Republic in August 1919. It included an episode known as the [[Social:Bavarian Soviet Republic|Bavarian Soviet Republic]]<ref>"The Munich Soviet (or "Council Republic") of 1919 exhibited certain features of the TAZ, even though—like most revolutions—its stated goals were not exactly "temporary". Gustav Landauer's participation as Minister of Culture, along with Silvio Gesell as Minister of Economics and other anti-authoritarian and extreme libertarian socialists such as the poet/playwrights Erich Mühsam and Ernst Toller, and Ret Marut (the novelist B. Traven), gave the Soviet a distinct anarchist flavor." Hakim Bey. [http://www.theanarchistlibrary.org/HTML/Hakim_Bey__T.A.Z.__The_Temporary_Autonomous_Zone__Ontological_Anarchy__Poetic_Terrorism.html "T.A.Z.: The Temporary Autonomous Zone, Ontological Anarchy, Poetic Terrorism"]</ref><ref>{{cite book |last=Gaab |first=Jeffrey S. |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=-X4jgPG0360C&pg=PA58 |title=Munich: Hofbräuhaus & History: Beer, Culture, & Politics |publisher=Peter Lang |page=59 |isbn=978-0820486062 |date=2006 |via=[[Google Books]]}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |last=Taylor |first=Edumund |title=The Fall of the Dynasties: The Collapse of Old Order |date=1963 |publisher=Weidenfeld & Nicolson |page=365}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |first1=Paul |last1=Werner |first2=Paul |last2=Frölich |title=Die Bayerische Räterepublik. Tatsachen und Kritik |language=de |trans-title=The Bavarian Soviet Republic. Facts and criticism |page=144}}</ref> and the Spartacist uprising. A short lived [[Social:Hungarian Soviet Republic|Hungarian Soviet Republic]] was set up in Hungary March 21 to August 1, 1919. It was led by Béla Kun.<ref>Janos, Andrew C. & Slottman, William (editors) Revolution in perspective: essays on the Hungarian Soviet Republic of 1919, Center for Slavic and East European Studies, University of California, Berkeley, 1971.</ref><ref>{{cite book |first=Jack A. |last=Goldstone |date=2015 |title=The Encyclopedia of Political Revolutions |publisher=[[Company:Routledge|Routledge]] |pages=227 |isbn=978-1135937584}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |first1=Peter F. |last1=Sugar |first2=Péter |last2=Hanák |first3=Tibor |last3=Frank |date=1994 |title=A History of Hungary |publisher=Indiana University Press |isbn=978-0253208675}}</ref>{{page needed|date=August 2021}} It instituted a Red Terror.<ref>{{cite book |last1=Werth |first1=Nicolas |last2=Bartosek |first2=Karel |last3=Panne |first3=Jean-Louis |last4=Margolin |first4=Jean-Louis |last5=Paczkowski |first5=Andrzej |last6=Courtois |first6=Stephane |date=1999 |title=Black Book of Communism: Crimes, Terror, Repression |publisher=Harvard University Press |isbn=0674076087}}</ref>{{page needed|date=August 2021}} After the regime was put down, an even more brutal White Terror followed. Kun managed to escape to the Soviet Union, where he co-led murder of tens of thousands of White Russians.<ref>{{cite book |first=Donald |last=Rayfield |title=Stalin and His Hangmen: The Tyrant and Those Who Killed for Him |location=New York |publisher={{wipe|Random House}} |date=2004 |page=83}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.iccrimea.org/historical/crimeanturks.html |title=Complete Destruction of National Groups as Groups – The Crimean Turks |website=International Committee for Crimea |access-date=20 August 2021}}</ref> He was killed in the 1930 Soviet purges.<ref>Borsányi, The Life of a Communist Revolutionary; pp. x, 436.</ref><ref>"New information about death of Bela Kun," from BBC transmission of Hungarian Telegraph Agency in English, 14 February 1989</ref>

In Italy, the events known as the ''Biennio Rosso''<ref name="Dallacasa">Brunella Dalla Casa, ''Composizione di classe, rivendicazioni e professionalità nelle lotte del "biennio rosso" a Bologna'', in: AA. VV, ''Bologna 1920; le origini del fascismo'', a cura di Luciano Casali, Cappelli, Bologna 1982, p. 179.</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=http://libcom.org/history/articles/italy-factory-occupations-1920 |title=1918–1921: The Italian factory occupations and Biennio Rosso |website=libcom.org |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20111105224302/http://libcom.org/history/articles/italy-factory-occupations-1920 |archive-date=5 November 2011}}</ref> were characterised by mass strikes, worker demonstrations and self-management experiments through land and factory occupations. In Turin and Milan, workers' councils were formed and many factory occupations took place led by [[Social:Anarcho-syndicalism|anarcho-syndicalists]] organised around the [[Social:Unione Sindacale Italiana|Unione Sindacale Italiana]].<ref>The Unione Sindacale Italiana "grew to 800,000 members and the influence of the Italian Anarchist Union (20,000 members plus ''Umanita Nova'', its daily paper) grew accordingly&nbsp;... Anarchists were the first to suggest occupying workplaces." [http://libcom.org/history/articles/italy-factory-occupations-1920 "1918–1921: The Italian factory occupations – Biennio Rosso"] {{webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20111105224302/http://libcom.org/history/articles/italy-factory-occupations-1920 |date=5 November 2011 |via=[[Social:Libcom.org|libcom.org]]}}</ref>

There was a short-lived Persian Socialist Soviet Republic in 1920–21. Patagonia Rebelde was a syndicalist-led revolution in {{wipe|Argentina}} lasting for a year and a half from in 1920–21. The anarchist-led Guangzhou City Commune in China lasted six years from 1921. In 1924, the Mongolian People's Republic was established and was ruled by the Mongolian People's Party. The Shinmin Prefecture in [[Place:Manchuria|Manchuria]] lasted two years from 1929. Many of these revolutions initiated societies and economic models that have been described as socialist.<ref name="The Anarchist Library 2012">{{cite book |title=Cartography of Revolutionary Anarchism |via=The Anarchist Library |year=2012 |url=https://theanarchistlibrary.org/library/michael-schmidt-cartography-of-revolutionary-anarchism?v=1617967506 |access-date=8 October 2021}}</ref>

==== 4th World Congress of the Communist International ====
In 1922, the fourth congress of the [[Organization:Communist International|Communist International]] took up the policy of the [[Social:United front|united front]]. It urged communists to work with rank-and-file social democrats while remaining critical of their leaders. They criticised those leaders for betraying the working class by supporting the capitalists' war efforts. The social democrats pointed to the dislocation caused by revolution and later the growing authoritarianism of the communist parties. The Labour Party rejected the Communist Party of Great Britain's application to affiliate to them in 1920.

On seeing the Soviet State's growing coercive power in 1923, a dying Lenin said Russia had reverted to "a bourgeois tsarist machine ... barely varnished with socialism".<ref>{{cite book |last=Serge |first=Victor |title=From Lenin to Stalin |page=55}}</ref> After Lenin's death in January 1924, the Communist Party of the Soviet Union—then increasingly under the control of {{wipe|Joseph Stalin}}—rejected the theory that socialism could not be built solely in the Soviet Union in favour of the concept of [[Social:Socialism in one country|socialism in one country]]. Stalin developed a bureaucratic and [[Philosophy:Totalitarianism|totalitarian]] government, which was condemned by democratic socialists and anarchists for undermining the Revolution's ideals.<ref>{{cite book |author-link=Victor Serge |last=Serge |first=Victor |title=From Lenin to Stalin |page=52}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |last=Brinton |first=Maurice |author-link=Maurice Brinton |title=The Bolsheviks and Workers' Control 1917–1921: The State and Counter-revolution |publisher=Solidarity |year=1975 |url=http://www.spunk.org/texts/places/russia/sp001861/bolintro.html |access-date=22 January 2007 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20061220120533/http://www.spunk.org/texts/places/russia/sp001861/bolintro.html |archive-date=20 December 2006}}</ref>

The Russian Revolution and its aftermath motivated national Communist parties elsewhere that gained political and social influence, such as those in France, the United States, Italy, China, Mexico, Brazil, Chile. and Indonesia.

Left-wing groups which did not agree to the centralisation and abandonment of the soviets by the Bolshevik Party (see [[Social:Anti-Stalinist left|anti-Stalinist left]]) led left-wing uprisings against the Bolsheviks. Such groups included Socialist Revolutionaries,<ref name="carr1985">{{cite book |last=Carr |first=E. H. |title=The Bolshevik Revolution 1917–1923 |publisher=W. W. Norton & Company |date=1985}}</ref> Left Socialist Revolutionaries, [[Organization:Mensheviks|Mensheviks]] and anarchists.<ref name="avrich1968">{{cite journal |last=Avrich |first=Paul |title=Russian Anarchists and the Civil War |journal=Russian Review |volume=27 |number=3 |date=July 1968 |pages=296–306 |publisher=Blackwell Publishing|doi=10.2307/127258 |jstor=127258}}</ref> Within this left-wing discontent, the most large-scale events were the Kronstadt rebellion<ref name="Guttridge2006">{{cite book |last=Guttridge |first=Leonard F. |title=Mutiny: A History of Naval Insurrection |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=Hk9-IMRGtbcC&pg=PA174 |date=2006 |publisher=Naval Institute Press |isbn=978-1591143482 |page=174 |via=[[Google Books]]}}</ref><ref name="Smele2006">{{cite book |last=Smele |first=Jonathan |title=The Russian Revolution and Civil War 1917–1921: An Annotated Bibliography |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=XN1k1M2I060C&pg=PA628 |publisher=Continuum |isbn=978-1591143482 |page=336 |date=2006 |via=[[Google Books]]}}</ref><ref name="Avrich1970">{{cite book |last=Avrich |first=Paul |author-link=Paul Avrich |title=Kronstadt 1921 |publisher=Princeton University Press |isbn=978-0691-087214 |year=1970}}</ref> and the Makhnovist movement.<ref name="web.archive.org">Noel-Schwartz, Heather. [https://web.archive.org/web/20080118074241/http://members.aol.com/ThryWoman/MRR.html The Makhnovists & The Russian Revolution – Organization, Peasantry and Anarchism]. Archived on [[Internet Archive]]. Accessed October 2010.</ref><ref>{{cite book |first=Peter |last=Marshall |author-link=Peter Marshall (author) |title=Demanding the Impossible |publisher=PM Press |date=2010 |page=473}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |last=Skirda |first=Alexandre |title=Nestor Makhno: Anarchy's Cossack |publisher=AK Press |date=2004 |page=34}}</ref>

==== The Second International and the Two-and-a-Half International ====
The [[Social:International Socialist Commission|International Socialist Commission]] (ISC, also known as Berne International) was formed in February 1919 at a meeting in [[Place:Bern|Bern]] by parties that wanted to resurrect the Second International.{{sfnp|Lamb|Docherty|2006|p=52}} Centrist socialist parties which did not want to be a part of the resurrected Second International (ISC) or Comintern formed the [[Social:International Working Union of Socialist Parties|International Working Union of Socialist Parties]] (IWUSP, also known as Vienna International, Vienna Union, or Two-and-a-Half International) on 27 February 1921 at a conference in Vienna.{{sfnp|Lamb|Docherty|2006|p=177}} The ISC and the IWUSP joined to form the Labour and Socialist International (LSI) in May 1923 at a meeting in [[Place:Hamburg|Hamburg]].{{sfnp|Lamb|Docherty|2006|p=197}}

=== From the Great Depression to the World War ===
The 1920s and 1930s were marked by an increasing divergence between democratic and reformists socialists (mainly affiliated with the Labour and Socialist International) and revolutionary socialists (mainly affiliated with the Communist International), but also by tension within the Communist movement between the dominant Stalinists and dissidents such as Trotsky's followers in the Left Opposition. Trotsky's [[Organization:Fourth International|Fourth International]] was established in France in 1938 when [[Social:Trotskyism|Trotskyists]] argued that the [[Organization:Communist International|Comintern]] or Third International had become irretrievably "lost to [[Social:Stalinism|Stalinism]]" and thus incapable of leading the working class to power.<ref name="transitional">{{cite web |url=http://www.marxists.org/archive/trotsky/1938/tp/index.htm |first=Leon |last=Trotsky |date=1938 |title=The Transitional Program |access-date=5 November 2008 |website=Marxists Internet Archive}}</ref>

==== Spanish Civil War ====
[[File:Milicianas CNT-FAI.png|thumb|[[Social:Federación Anarquista Ibérica|FAI]] militia during the Spanish Revolution in 1936]]
In the Spanish Civil War (1936–1939), socialists (including the democratic socialist Spanish Socialist Workers' Party and the Marxist Workers' Party of Marxist Unification) participated on the Republican side, loyal to the left-leaning Popular Front government of the [[Place:Second Spanish Republic|Second Spanish Republic]], in alliance with anarchists of the [[Social:Anarcho-communism|communist]] and [[Social:Anarcho-syndicalism|syndicalist]] variety and supported by the socialist Workers' General Union.<ref>{{cite book |last=Beevor |first=Antony |year=2006 |page=46 |title=The Battle for Spain: The Spanish Civil War 1936–1939 |publisher=Weidenfeld & Nicolson |location=London |isbn=978-0297848325}}</ref>

The Spanish Revolution of 1936 was a workers' [[Social:Social revolution|social revolution]] during the war, that is often seen as a model of socialism from below.<ref name="Prichard 2012 p.">{{cite book |last=Prichard |first=Alex |title=Libertarian socialism: politics in black and red |publisher=[[Company:Palgrave Macmillan|Palgrave Macmillan]] |publication-place=New York |year=2012 |isbn=978-0230280373 |oclc=792880396 |page=}}</ref><ref name="Ness 2011 p.">{{cite book |last=Ness |first=Immanuel |title=Ours to master and to own: workers' councils from the commune to the present |publisher=[[Company:Haymarket Books|Haymarket Books]] |publication-place=Chicago, Ill |year=2011 |isbn=978-1608461196 |oclc=754714826 |page=}}</ref> An anarchist-inspired movement of peasants and workers, supported by armed militias, took control of [[Place:Barcelona|Barcelona]] and of large areas of rural Spain where they collectivised the land.<ref name="Bolloten 1984, p. 54">{{cite book |last=Bolloten |first=Burnett |title=The Spanish Civil War: Revolution and Counterrevolution |publisher=University of North Carolina Press |date=1984 |page=1107 |isbn=978-0807819067}}</ref> The Spanish Revolution was a workers' [[Social:Social revolution|social revolution]] that began with the Spanish Civil War in 1936 and resulted in the widespread implementation of anarchist and more broadly libertarian socialist organisational principles in some areas for two to three years, primarily Catalonia, Aragon, Andalusia and parts of Levante. Much of Spain's economy came under worker control. In anarchist strongholds like Catalonia the figure was as high as 75%, but lower in areas with heavy Communist Party influence, which actively resisted attempts at collectivisation. Factories were run through worker committees, [[Earth:Agriculture|agrarian]] areas became collectivised and run as [[Philosophy:Libertarian socialism|libertarian]] communes. Anarchist historian Sam Dolgoff estimated that about eight million people participated directly or indirectly in the Spanish Revolution.<ref>{{cite book |first=Sam |last=Dolgoff |author-link=Sam Dolgoff |title=The Anarchist Collectives Workers' Self-management in the Spanish Revolution 1936–1939 |publisher=Free Life Editions |edition=1st |date=1974 |pages=6–7}}</ref>

=== Mid-20th century ===
==== Post-World War II ====
{{main|History:Cold War|Social:Post-war consensus}}
The rise of [[Social:Nazism|Nazism]] and the start of [[Social:World War II|World War II]] led to the dissolution of the LSI in 1940. After the War, the [[Organization:Socialist International|Socialist International]] was formed in Frankfurt in July 1951 as its successor.{{sfnp|Lamb|Docherty|2006|p=320}}

After World War II, social democratic governments introduced social reform and wealth redistribution via welfare and taxation. Social democratic parties dominated post-war politics in countries such as France, Italy, Czechoslovakia, Belgium and {{wipe|Norway}}. At one point, France claimed to be the world's most state-controlled capitalist country. It nationalised public utilities including Charbonnages de France (CDF), Électricité de France (EDF), [[Company:Gaz de France|Gaz de France]] (GDF), Air France, Banque de France and Régie Nationale des Usines Renault.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.sund.ac.uk/~os0tmc/contem/trente1.htm |title=Les trente glorieuses: 1945–1975 |language=fr |trans-title=The Glorious Thirties: 1945–1975 |publisher=Sund.ac.uk |access-date=30 October 2011 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20070928010635/http://www.sund.ac.uk/~os0tmc/contem/trente1.htm |archive-date=28 September 2007}}</ref>

In 1945, the British Labour Party led by Clement Attlee was elected based on a radical socialist programme. The Labour government nationalised industries including mines, gas, coal, electricity, rail, iron, steel and the Bank of England. British Petroleum was officially nationalised in 1951.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://yourarchives.nationalarchives.gov.uk/index.php?title=Nationalisation_of_Anglo-Iranian_Oil_Company%2C_1951 |title=Nationalisation of Anglo-Iranian Oil Company, 1951 |publisher=Yourarchives.nationalarchives.gov.uk |date=11 June 2007 |access-date=30 October 2011 |archive-date=1 October 2011 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20111001135131/http://yourarchives.nationalarchives.gov.uk/index.php?title=Nationalisation_of_Anglo-Iranian_Oil_Company%2C_1951 |url-status=dead }}</ref> Anthony Crosland said that in 1956 25% of British industry was nationalised and that public employees, including those in nationalised industries, constituted a similar proportion of the country's workers.<ref>{{cite book |last=Crosland |first=Anthony |title=The Future of Socialism |pages=9, 89 |publisher=Constable |date=2006}}</ref> The Labour Governments of 1964–1970 and 1974–1979 intervened further.<ref>{{cite journal |first=R. |last=Toye |title=The New Commanding Height: Labour Party Policy on North Sea Oil and Gas, 1964–74 |journal=Contemporary British History |volume=16 |issue=1 |date=2002 |pages=89–118 |doi=10.1080/713999440 |s2cid=153553167}}</ref> It re-nationalised British Steel (1967) after the Conservatives had denationalised it and nationalised British Leyland (1976).<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.uksteel.org.uk/history.htm |title=UK steel: EEF |publisher=UK steel |date=12 September 2013 |access-date=11 October 2013 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080123091612/http://www.uksteel.org.uk/history.htm |archive-date=23 January 2008}}</ref> The National Health Service provided taxpayer-funded health care to everyone, free at the point of service.<ref>{{cite book |last=Bevan |first=Aneurin |title=In Place of Fear |edition=2nd |publisher=MacGibbon and Kee |date=1961 |pages=104}}</ref> Working-class housing was provided in council housing estates and university education became available via a school grant system.{{sfnp|Beckett|2007|p=247}}

==== Nordic countries ====
[[File:Einar Gerhardsen 1945.jpeg|thumb|upright|Einar Gerhardsen, Prime Minister of Norway for the Labour Party]]
During most of the post-war era, Sweden was governed by the Swedish Social Democratic Party largely in cooperation with trade unions and industry.<ref name="svensteinmo">{{cite journal |title=Globalization and Taxation: Challenges to the Swedish Welfare State |first=Sven |last=Steinmo |journal=Political Insight |volume=35 |issue=7 |date=1 September 2002 |doi=10.1177/0010414002035007004 |s2cid=153819607}}</ref> The party held power from 1936 to 1976, 1982 to 1991, 1994 to 2006 and 2014 to 2022, most often in minority governments. Party leader Tage Erlander led the government from 1946 to 1969, the longest uninterrupted parliamentary government. These governments substantially expanded the [[Social:Welfare state|welfare state]].<ref>{{citation|last=Giverholt |first=Helge |title=Tage Erlander |trans-title=Take Erlander |date=19 November 2018 |url=http://snl.no/Tage_Erlander |work=Store norske leksikon |language=no |access-date=30 November 2019 |quote=Erlander satt lenger som statsminister enn noen annen i et parlamentarisk system, og han mer enn noen annen politiker preget Sveriges utvikling de første tiårene etter andre verdenskrig. Spesielt er hans navn knyttet til utviklingen av det moderne velferdssamfunnet og Sveriges nøytralitet i etterkrigstiden. |trans-quote=Erlander served longer as prime minister than anyone else in a parliamentary system, and he more than any other politician influenced Sweden's development in the first decades after the Second World War. In particular, his name is linked to the development of the modern welfare society and Sweden's neutrality in the post-war period.}}</ref> Swedish Prime Minister Olof Palme identified as a "democratic socialist"<ref>Palme, Olof (1982). "Därför är jag demokratisk socialist". Speech at the 1982 congress of the Swedish Social Democratic Party.</ref> and was described as a "revolutionary reformist".<ref>{{cite news |last=Linderborg |first=Åsa |date=28 February 2006 |url=http://www.aftonbladet.se/vss/kultur/story/0,2789,785030,00.html |title=Detta borde vara vårt arv |language=sv |trans-title=This should be our legacy |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20060310174240/http://www.aftonbladet.se/vss/kultur/story/0,2789,785030,00.html |archive-date=10 March 2006 |work=Aftonbladet |access-date=14 November 2019}}</ref>

The Norwegian Labour Party was established in 1887 and was largely a trade union federation. The party did not proclaim a socialist agenda, elevating [[Philosophy:Universal suffrage|universal suffrage]] and dissolution of the [[History:Union between Sweden and Norway|union with Sweden]] as its top priorities. In 1899, the Norwegian Confederation of Trade Unions separated from the Labour Party. Around the time of the Russian Revolution, the Labour Party moved to the left and joined the [[Organization:Communist International|Communist International]] from 1919 through 1923. Thereafter, the party still regarded itself as revolutionary, but the party's left-wing broke away and established the Communist Party of Norway while the Labour Party gradually adopted a reformist line around 1930. In 1935, Johan Nygaardsvold established a coalition that lasted until 1945.<ref name="SNL">{{citation|last1=Tvedt |first1=Knut Are |title=Arbeiderpartiet |trans-title=The Labor Party |date=14 September 2019 |url=http://snl.no/Arbeiderpartiet |work=Store norske leksikon |language=no |access-date=30 November 2019 |last2=Bull |first2=Edvard |last3=Garvik |first3=Olav}}</ref>

From 1946 to 1962, the Norwegian Labour Party held an absolute majority in the parliament led by Einar Gerhardsen, who remained Prime Minister for seventeen years. Although the party abandoned most of its pre-war socialist ideas, the welfare state was expanded under Gerhardsen to ensure the universal provision of basic human rights and stabilise the economy.<ref name="Esping-Andersen">Esping-Andersen, G. (1991). ''The Three Worlds of Welfare Capitalism''. Princeton, NJ: Princeton University Press.</ref> In the 1945 Norwegian parliamentary election, the Communist Party took 12% of the votes, but it largely vanished during the Cold War.<ref>{{cite web |title=Norges Kommunistiske Parti |trans-title=Norwegian Communist Party |work=Store norske leksikon |date=21 July 2021 |access-date=11 October 2021 |url=https://snl.no/Norges_Kommunistiske_Parti |language=nb}}</ref> In the 1950s, [[Social:Popular socialism|popular socialism]] emerged in Nordic countries. It placed itself between communism and social democracy.<ref>Fog, Mogens; Kragh, Jens, Larsen, Aksel, Moltke, Kai; Petersen, Gert (1977). [https://books.google.com/books?id=MfqkmgEACAAJ ''Folkesocialisme'']. SP Forl.</ref> In the early 1960s, the Socialist Left Party challenged the Labour Party from the left.<ref name="SNL"/> Also in the 1960s, Gerhardsen established a planning agency and tried to establish a planned economy.<ref name="Esping-Andersen"/> In the 1970s, a more radical socialist party, the Worker's Communist Party (AKP), broke from the Socialist Left Party and had notable influence in student associations and some trade unions. The AKP identified with Communist China and Albania rather than the [[Place:Soviet Union|Soviet Union]].<ref>[https://snl.no/Arbeidernes_Kommunistparti "Arbeidernes Kommunistparti"] ["Workers' Communist Party"]. ''Store norske leksikon'' (in Norwegian). Retrieved 5 August 2020.</ref>

[[File:Minister Van der Stoel (PvdA, rechts, Buitenlandse Zaken) met Olof Palme (links), Bestanddeelnr 931-8203 (cropped) (2).jpg|thumb|upright|Olof Palme, Prime Minister of Sweden for the Swedish Social Democratic Party]]
In countries such as Sweden, the [[Finance:Rehn–Meidner model|Rehn–Meidner model]]<ref>Schmitt, John; Zipperer, Ben (2006). [http://www.paecon.net/PAEReview/issue40/SchmittZipper40.htm "Is the U.S. a Good Model for Reducing Social Exclusion in Europe?"]. ''The Post-autistic Economics Review''. '''40''' (1).</ref> allowed capitalists owning productive and efficient firms to retain profits at the expense of the firms' workers, exacerbating inequality and causing workers to agitate for a share of the profits in the 1970s. At that time, women working in the state sector began to demand better wages. Rudolf Meidner established a study committee that came up with a 1976 proposal to transfer excess profits into worker-controlled investment funds, with the intention that firms would create jobs and pay higher wages rather than reward company owners and managers.{{sfnp|Newman|2005}} Capitalists immediately labeled this proposal as socialism and launched an unprecedented opposition—including calling off the class compromise established in the 1938 Saltsjöbaden Agreement.<ref>{{cite book |title=The Primacy of Politics: Social Democracy and the Making of Europe's Twentieth Century |last=Berman |first=Sheri |publisher={{wipe|Cambridge University Press}} |year=2006 |location=Cambridge}}</ref> Social democratic parties are some of the oldest such parties and operate in all Nordic countries. Countries or political systems that have long been dominated by social democratic parties are often labelled social democratic.<ref>{{citation|title=Sosialdemokratiske partier |trans-title=Social democratic parties |date=26 November 2018|url=http://snl.no/sosialdemokratiske_partier |work=Store norske leksikon |language=no |access-date=30 November 2019}}</ref><ref>{{citation|last=Thorsen |first=Dag Einar |title=sosialdemokrati |trans-title=social democracy |date=29 June 2019 |url=http://snl.no/sosialdemokrati |work=Store norske leksikon |language=no |access-date=30 November 2019 |quote=Det forekommer også at land eller politiske systemer omtales som sosialdemokratiske, dersom slike partier har vært toneangivende i politikkutformingen over lengre tid. |trans-quote=It also happens that countries or political systems are referred to as social democratic, if such parties have been setting the tone in policy-making for a long time.}}</ref> Those countries fit the social democratic type of "high socialism" which is described as favouring "a high level of decommodification and a low degree of stratification".<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Ferragina |first1=Emanuele |last2=Seeleib-Kaiser |first2=Martin |date=October 2011 |url=http://www.louischauvel.org/Welfare_regime_debate.pdf |title=Welfare Regime Debate: Past, Present, Futures? |journal=Policy and Politics |publisher=Policy Press |volume=39 |issue=4 |pages=583–611 |doi=10.1332/030557311X603592 |s2cid=146986126 |access-date=5 August 2020}}</ref>

The Nordic model is a form of economic-political system common to the [[Place:Nordic countries|Nordic countries]] ({{wipe|Denmark}}, {{wipe|Finland}}, Iceland, Norway and Sweden). It has three main ingredients, namely peaceful, institutionalised negotiation between employers and trade unions; active, predictable and measured macroeconomic policy; and universal welfare and free education. The welfare system is governmental in Norway and Sweden whereas trade unions play a greater role in Denmark, Finland and Iceland.<ref name="Fafo">{{cite web |url=https://www.fafo.no/index.php/zoo-publikasjoner/fafo-rapporter/item/den-nordiske-modellen-mot-2030-et-nytt-kapittel |title=Den nordiske modellen mot 2030. Et nytt kapittel?Fafo-rapport 2014:46 |trans-title=The Nordic model towards 2030. A new chapter? Fafo report 2014:46 |last1=Dølvik |first1=Jon Erik |first2=Tone |last2=Fløtten |first3=Jon M. |last3=Hippe |first4=Bård |last4=Jordfald |date=2014 |publisher=Fafo |language=nb-no |access-date=30 November 2019}}</ref>{{sfnp|Brandal|Bratberg|Thorsen|2013}}<ref name="Moene">{{cite book |last1=Moene |first1=Karl Ove |first2=Michael |last2=Wallerstein |editor1-first=Pranab K. |editor1-last=Bardhan |editor2-first=Samuel |editor2-last=Bowles |editor3-first=Michael |editor3-last=Wallerstein |chapter=Social democracy as a development strategy |title=Globalization and egalitarian redistribution |year=2006 |pages=148–168}}</ref><ref name="Byrkjeflot">{{cite book |last=Byrkjeflot |first=Haldor |title="The Nordic model of democracy and management." The democratic challenge to capitalism: Management and democracy in the Nordic countries |year=2001 |pages=19–45}}</ref> The Nordic universal welfare model is often labelled social democratic and contrasted with the selective continental model and the residual Anglo-American model.<ref>{{Cite book |last=Jespersen |first=Kaj Pinholt |title=Temaer til samfundsfag |publisher=Columbus |year=2019 |isbn=978-87-7970-505-0 |edition=1st |location=[[Place:Copenhagen|Copenhagen]] |pages=49–54 |language=Danish}}</ref> Major reforms in the Nordic countries are the results of consensus and compromise across the political spectrum. Key reforms were implemented under social democratic cabinets in Denmark, Norway and Sweden while centre-right parties dominated during the implementation of the model in Finland and Iceland. Since World War II, Nordic countries have largely maintained a social democratic mixed economy, characterised by labour force participation, gender equality, egalitarian and universal benefits, redistribution of wealth and expansionary fiscal policy.<ref name="Esping-Andersen"/><ref name="Fafo"/><ref>Hernes, Gudmund (1978): "Makt, blandingsøkonomi og blandingsadministrasjon". In Gudmund Hernes, ed., ''Forhandlingsøkonomi og blandingsadministrasjon''. Oslo: Universitetsforlaget.</ref> In 2015, then-Prime Minister of Denmark Lars Løkke Rasmussen denied that Denmark is socialist, saying "I know that some people in the US associate the Nordic model with some sort of socialism. Therefore I would like to make one thing clear. Denmark is far from a socialist planned economy. Denmark is a market economy".<ref>{{Cite news |date=2015-11-01 |title=Danish PM in US: Denmark is not socialist |url=https://www.thelocal.dk/20151101/danish-pm-in-us-denmark-is-not-socialist/ |access-date=2022-04-20 |website=The Local DK |language=en-US}}</ref>

In Norway, the first mandatory social insurances were introduced by conservative cabinets in 1895 (Francis Hagerups's cabinet) and 1911 (Konow's Cabinet). During the 1930s, the Labour Party adopted the conservatives' welfare state project. After World War II, all political parties agreed that the welfare state should be expanded. Universal social security ({{lang|nb|Folketrygden}}) was introduced by the conservative Borten's Cabinet.<ref>{{citation|last1=Mæland |first1=John Gunnar |title=folketrygden |trans-title=the national insurance |date=14 October 2019 |url=http://snl.no/folketrygden |work=Store norske leksikon |language=nb |access-date=19 August 2020 |last2=Hatland |first2=Aksel |last3=Pedersen |first3=Axel West}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |last=Jenssen |first=Dag |date=2005 |title=Fra union til sosialdemokrati |trans-title=From union to social democracy |url=https://www.idunn.no/nnt/2005/04/boker |journal=Nytt Norsk Tidsskrift |language=no |volume=22 |issue=4 |pages=459–463 |doi=10.18261/ISSN1504-3053-2005-04-11 |issn=1504-3053}}</ref> Norway's economy is open to the international or European market for most products and services, joining the European Union's internal market in 1994 through European Economic Area. Some of the mixed economy institutions from the post-war period were relaxed by the conservative cabinet of the 1980s and the finance market was deregulated.<ref>{{cite book |chapter-url=https://www.emerald.com/insight/content/doi/10.1108/S0195-6310(2011)0000028008/full/html |doi=10.1108/S0195-6310(2011)0000028008 |chapter=The Integration of the Norwegian Oil Economy into the World Economy |title=The Nordic Varieties of Capitalism |series=Comparative Social Research |year=2011 |last1=Mjøset |first1=Lars |last2=Cappelen |first2=Ådne |volume=28 |pages=167–263 |isbn=978-0857247773}}</ref> Within the ''Varieties of Capitalism''-framework, Finland, Norway and Sweden are identified as coordinated market economies.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Hall |first1=Peter A. |last2=Gingerich |first2=Daniel W. |date=2009 |title=Varieties of Capitalism and Institutional Complementarities in the Political Economy: An Empirical Analysis |journal=British Journal of Political Science |volume=39 |issue=3 |pages=449–482 |doi=10.1017/S0007123409000672 |jstor=27742754 |hdl=11858/00-001M-0000-002D-D630-E |s2cid=6709114 |issn=0007-1234 |url=http://nrs.harvard.edu/urn-3:HUL.InstRepos:4481421 |hdl-access=free}}</ref>

==== Soviet Union and Eastern Europe ====
The Soviet era saw competition between the Soviet-led Eastern Bloc and the United States-led Western Bloc. The Soviet system was seen as a rival of and a threat to Western capitalism for most of the 20th century.<ref>{{cite encyclopedia |last=Georgakas |first=Dan |date=1992 |title=The Hollywood Blacklist |encyclopedia=Encyclopedia of the American Left |edition=paperback |location=Champaign, Illinois |publisher=University of Illinois Press |isbn=978-0252062506}}</ref>{{page number needed|date=September 2021}}

The Eastern Bloc was the group of [[Social:Communist state|Communist state]]s of [[Place:Central and Eastern Europe|Central and Eastern Europe]], including the Soviet Union and the countries of the [[Organization:Warsaw Pact|Warsaw Pact]],<ref name=houghlin>{{Citation |last1=Hirsch |first1=Donald |first2=Joseph F. |last2=Kett |first3=James S. |last3=Trefil |title=The New Dictionary of Cultural Literacy |publisher=Houghton Mifflin Harcourt |year=2002 |isbn=978-0618226474 |page=[https://archive.org/details/newdictionaryofc00hirs/page/316 316] |quote=Eastern Bloc. The name applied to the former communist states of eastern Europe, including Yugoslavia and Albania, as well as the countries of the Warsaw Pact |url=https://archive.org/details/newdictionaryofc00hirs/page/316}}</ref><ref>{{citation |last1=Satyendra |first1=Kush |title=Encyclopaedic dictionary of political science |publisher=Sarup & Sons |year=2003 |isbn=978-817890-0711 |page=65 |quote=the countries of Eastern Europe under communism}}</ref><ref>Compare {{cite book |last1=Janzen |first1=Jörg |last2=Taraschewski |first2=Thomas |editor-last=Shahshahānī |editor-first=Suhaylā |title=Cities of Pilgrimage |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=0T7DAJqAN7wC |access-date=21 December 2012 |series=Iuaes-series |volume=4 |year=2009 |publisher=LIT Verlag |location=Münster |isbn=978-3825816186 |page=190 |quote=Until 1990, despite being a formally independent state, Mongolia had de facto been an integral part of the Soviet dominated Eastern Bloc. |via=[[Google Books]]}}</ref> including Poland, the German Democratic Republic, the Hungary, Bulgaria, Czechoslovakia, [[Place:Socialist Republic of Romania|Romania]], Albania, and initially Yugoslavia. In the [[History:Informbiro period|Informbiro period]] from 1948, Yugoslavia under Josip Broz Tito pursued a different, more decentralised form of state socialism than the rest of the Eastern Bloc, known as [[Philosophy:Socialist self-management|Socialist self-management]].

The Hungarian Revolution of 1956, a spontaneous nationwide revolt against the Communist government brutally suppressed by Soviet forces, and USSR leader Nikita Khrushchev's denunciation of the excesses of Stalin's regime during the Twentieth Communist Party Congress the same year<ref>John Rettie, [http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/programmes/from_our_own_correspondent/4723942.stm "The day Khrushchev denounced Stalin"], BBC, 18 February 2006.</ref> produced disunity within Western European Communist parties,<ref>Within the Italian Communist Party (PCI) a split ensued: most ordinary members and the Party leadership, including [[Biography:Palmiro Togliatti|Palmiro Togliatti]] and Giorgio Napolitano, regarded the Hungarian insurgents as counter-revolutionaries, as reported in ''l'Unità'', the official PCI newspaper. The following are references in English on the conflicting positions of [https://web.archive.org/web/20071017045856/http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,808752,00.html ''l'Unità''], [https://web.archive.org/web/20070930215213/http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,808824,00.html Antonio Giolitti and party boss Palmiro Togliatti], [https://web.archive.org/web/20070903094148/http://www.time.com/time/magazine/article/0,9171,868066,00.html Giuseppe Di Vittorio] and [https://www.britannica.com/biography/Pietro-Nenni Pietro Nenni].</ref><ref>Giuseppe Di Vittorio (chief of the Communist trade union CGIL) repudiated the leadership position as did the prominent party members Antonio Giolitti, Loris Fortuna and many other influential communist intellectuals, who later were expelled or left the party. Pietro Nenni, the national secretary of the Italian Socialist Party, a close ally of the PCI, opposed the Soviet intervention as well. Napolitano, elected in 2006 as President of the Italian Republic, wrote in his 2005 political autobiography that he regretted his justification of Soviet action in Hungary and that at the time he believed in party unity and the international leadership of Soviet communism. See {{cite book |last=Napolitano |first=Giorgio |year=2005 |title=Dal Pci al socialismo europeo. Un'autobiografia politica (From the Communist Party to European Socialism. A political autobiography) |publisher=Laterza|language=it |isbn=978-8842077152}}</ref><ref>Within the Communist Party of Great Britain (CPGB), dissent that began with the repudiation of Stalin by John Saville and E.P. Thompson, influential historians and members of the Communist Party Historians Group, culminated in a loss of thousands of party members as events unfolded in Hungary. Peter Fryer, correspondent for the CPGB newspaper ''The Daily Worker'', reported accurately on the violent suppression of the uprising, but his dispatches were heavily censored; Fryer resigned from the paper upon his return, and was later expelled from the Communist Party. Fryer, Peter (1957). ''Hungarian Tragedy''. London: D. Dobson. Chapter 9 (The Second Soviet Intervention). {{ASIN|B0007J7674}}.</ref><ref>In France, moderate Communists, such as historian [[Biography:Emmanuel Le Roy Ladurie|Emmanuel Le Roy Ladurie]], resigned, questioning the policy of supporting Soviet actions by the French Communist Party. The French anarchist philosopher and writer [[Biography:Albert Camus|Albert Camus]] wrote an open letter, ''The Blood of the Hungarians'', criticising the West's lack of action. Even [[Biography:Jean-Paul Sartre|Jean-Paul Sartre]], still a determined Communist Party member, criticised the Soviets in his article ''Le Fantôme de Staline'', in ''Situations VII''. Sartre, Jean-Paul (1956), [http://www.humanite.presse.fr/journal/2005-06-21/2005-06-21-809020 L'intellectuel et les communistes français {{in lang|fr}}] {{dead link|date=June 2017 |bot=InternetArchiveBot |fix-attempted=yes}} Le Web de l'Humanite, 21 June 2005. Retrieved 24 October 2006.</ref> leading to the emergence of the [[Social:New Left|New Left]] (see below). Over a decade later, Czechoslovakia under Alexander Dubček also attempted to pursue a more democratic model of state socialism, under the name "[[Social:Socialism with a human face|Socialism with a human face]]", during the Prague Spring; this was also brutally suppressed by the Soviet Union.

==== Asia, Africa, and Latin America ====
In the post-war years, socialism became increasingly influential in many then-developing countries. Embracing Third World socialism, countries in Africa, Asia and Latin America often nationalised industries. During India's freedom movement and fight for independence, many figures in the left-wing faction of the [[Social:Indian National Congress|Indian National Congress]] organised themselves as the Congress Socialist Party. Their politics and those of the early and intermediate periods of Jayaprakash Narayan's career combined a commitment to the socialist transformation of society with a principled opposition to the one-party authoritarianism they perceived in the Stalinist model.<ref>{{cite journal |last=Appadorai |first=A. |year=1968|title=Recent Socialist Thought in India |journal=The Review of Politics |volume=30 |issue=3 |pages=349–362 |doi=10.1017/S0034670500041024 |jstor=1406397 |s2cid=145138254}}</ref>

The Chinese Communist Revolution was the second stage in the Chinese Civil War, which ended with the establishment of the People's Republic of China led by the Chinese Communist Party. The then-Chinese Kuomintang Party in the 1920s incorporated Chinese socialism as part of its ideology.<ref>{{cite book |last=Dirlik |first=Arif |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=S-aGLEtx7AYC&pg=PA20 |title=The Marxism in the Chinese revolution |publisher=Rowman & Littlefield |year=2005 |isbn=978-074253069-0 |page=20 |via=[[Google Books]]}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |author=((School of Politics and International Relations, University of Southern California, Von KleinSmid Institute of International Affairs)) |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=VHnmAAAAMAAJ |title=Studies in Comparative Communism |volume=21 |publisher=Butterworth-Heinemann |year=1988 |page=134 |via=[[Google Books]]}}</ref> Between 1958 and 1962 during the Great Leap Forward in the People's Republic of China, some 30 million people starved to death<ref>{{cite journal |pmc=1127087 |year=1999 |last1=Smil |first1=V. |title=China's great famine: 40 years later |journal=BMJ (Clinical Research Ed.) |volume=319 |issue=7225 |pages=1619–1621 |doi=10.1136/bmj.319.7225.1619 |pmid=10600969}}</ref> and at least 45 million died overall.<ref name=dikotterxii>Dikötter, Frank. ''Mao's Great Famine: The History of China's Most Devastating Catastrophe, 1958–62''. Walker & Company, 2010. p.&nbsp;xii ("at least 45 million people died unnecessarily") p.&nbsp;xiii ("6 to 8 percent of the victims were tortured to death or summarily killed—amounting to at least 2.5 million people.") p.&nbsp;333 ("a minimum of 45 million excess deaths"). {{ISBN|0802777686}}.</ref>

The emergence of this new political entity in the frame of the [[History:Cold War|Cold War]] was complex and painful. Several tentative efforts were made to organise newly independent states to establish a common front to limit the United States' and the Soviet Union's influence on them. This led to the Sino-Soviet split. The Non-Aligned Movement gathered around the figures of Jawaharlal Nehru of India, Sukarno of Indonesia, Josip Broz Tito of Yugoslavia and Gamal Abdel Nasser of [[Place:Egypt|Egypt]]. After the 1954 Geneva Conference which ended the French war in Vietnam, the 1955 Bandung Conference gathered Nasser, Nehru, Tito, Sukarno and Chinese Premier Zhou Enlai.<ref>{{cite web |title=Non-Aligned Movement {{!}} Definition, Mission, & Facts |url=https://www.britannica.com/topic/Non-Aligned-Movement |access-date=2020-07-10 |website=Encyclopedia Britannica |language=en}}</ref> As many African countries gained independence during the 1960s, some of them rejected capitalism in favour of African socialism as defined by Julius Nyerere of Tanzania, Léopold Senghor of Senegal, Kwame Nkrumah of Ghana and Sékou Touré of Guinea.<ref>{{cite book |last1=Friedland |first1=William |last2=Rosberg |first2=Carl Jr. |title=African Socialism |year=1964 |publisher=Stanford University Press |location=California |page=3}}</ref>

The Cuban Revolution (1953–1959) was an armed revolt conducted by Fidel Castro's 26th of July Movement and its allies against the government of Fulgencio Batista. Castro's government eventually adopted socialism and the communist ideology, becoming the Communist Party of Cuba in October 1965.<ref>{{cite web |title=Cuba Marks 50 Years Since 'Triumphant Revolution' |first=Guy |last=Raz |work=NPR |date=1 January 2009 |access-date=11 October 2021 
|url=https://www.npr.org/templates/story/story.php?storyId=98937598&t=1633972357243 |quote=}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=http://pdba.georgetown.edu/Constitutions/Cuba/vigente.html#mozTocId561012 |title=Cuba: Constitución |website=pdba.georgetown.edu |access-date=14 October 2017}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |first=Matthias |last=Luebbers |date=2009 |chapter=Cuba y el Socialismo |trans-chapter=Cuba and socialism |title=El comunismo cubano y su desarrollo dependiente |trans-title=Cuban communism and its dependent development |publisher=GRIN Verlag |access-date=14 August 2015 |page=3 |isbn=9783640336272 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=9GaUqqsXR7UC |via=[[Google Books]]}}</ref>

In Indonesia in the mid-1960s, a coup attempt blamed on the Communist Party of Indonesia (PKI) was countered by an [[Social:Indonesian mass killings of 1965–66|anti-communist purge]] led by [[Biography:Suharto|Suharto]], which mainly targeted the growing influence of the PKI and other leftist groups, with significant support from the United States, which culminated in the overthrow of Sukarno.<ref>

{{harvp|Robinson|2018|p=203}}: "... a US Embassy official in Jakarta, Robert Martens, had supplied the Indonesian Army with lists containing the names of thousands of PKI officials in the months after the alleged coup attempt. According to the journalist Kathy Kadane, 'As many as 5,000 names were furnished over a period of months to the Army there, and the Americans later checked off the names of those who had been killed or captured.' Despite Martens later denials of any such intent, these actions almost certainly aided in the death or detention of many innocent people. They also sent a powerful message that the US government agreed with and supported the army's campaign against the PKI, even as that campaign took its terrible toll in human lives."; {{harvp|Roosa|2006}}; {{harvp|Simpson|2010|p=193}}: "Washington did everything in its power to encourage and facilitate the army-led massacre of alleged PKI members, and U.S. officials worried only that the killing of the party's unarmed supporters might not go far enough, permitting Sukarno to return to power and frustrate the [Johnson] Administration's emerging plans for a post-Sukarno Indonesia."; {{harvp|Aarons|2007|pp=[https://books.google.com/books?id=dg0hWswKgTIC&pg=PA81 80–81]}}; {{harvp|Bevins|2020|pp=238–240}}</ref> These events resulted not only in the total destruction of the PKI but also the political left in Indonesia, and paved the way for a major shift in the balance of power in Southeast Asia towards the West, a significant turning point in the global [[History:Cold War|Cold War]].<ref>{{cite journal |last=Farid |first=Hilmar |date=2005 |title=Indonesia's original sin: mass killings and capitalist expansion, 1965–66 |journal=Inter-Asia Cultural Studies |volume=6 |issue=1 |pages=3–16 |doi=10.1080/1462394042000326879 |s2cid=145130614}}</ref>{{sfnp|Robinson|2018|p=177}}<ref>{{cite news |last=Bevins |first=Vincent |date=20 October 2017 |title=What the United States Did in Indonesia |url=https://www.theatlantic.com/international/archive/2017/10/the-indonesia-documents-and-the-us-agenda/543534/ |work=The Atlantic |access-date=17 September 2021}}</ref>

==== New Left ====
{{main|Social:New Left}}
The New Left was a term used mainly in the United Kingdom and United States in reference to activists, educators and others in the 1960s and 1970s who sought to implement a broad range of reforms on issues such as gay rights, abortion, gender roles and drugs<ref name="Carmines and Layman">Carmines, Edward G., and Geoffrey C. Layman. 1997. "Issue Evolution in Postwar American Politics." In Byron Shafer, ed., ''Present Discontents''. NJ:Chatham House Publishers.</ref> in contrast to earlier leftist or Marxist movements that had taken a more vanguardist approach to social justice and focused mostly on labour unionisation and questions of social class.<ref>{{cite book |first=Cynthia |last=Kaufman |title=Ideas for Action: Relevant Theory for Radical Change |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=3nJUwFqRLTwC&pg=PA275 |year=2003 |publisher=South End Press |isbn=978-0896086937 |page=275 |via=[[Google Books]]}}</ref><ref>{{cite book|first=Todd |last=Gitlin |chapter=The Left's Lost Universalism |editor1-first=Arthur M. |editor1-last=Melzer |editor2-first=Jerry |editor2-last=Weinberger |editor3-first=M. Richard |editor3-last=Zinman |title=Politics at the Turn of the Century |pages=3–26 |location=Lanham, MD |publisher=Rowman & Littlefield |date=2001}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |last=Farred |first=Grant |author-link=Grant Farred |year=2000 |title=Endgame Identity? Mapping the New Left Roots of Identity Politics |journal=New Literary History |volume=31 |issue=4 |pages=627–648 |jstor=20057628 |doi=10.1353/nlh.2000.0045 |s2cid=144650061}}</ref> The New Left rejected involvement with the labour movement and Marxism's historical theory of class struggle.<ref>{{cite book |first=Jeffrey W. |last=Coker |title=Confronting American Labor: The New Left Dilemma |publisher=University of Missouri Press |date=2002}}</ref>

In the United States, the New Left was associated with the Hippie movement and anti-war [[Social:Student activism|college campus protest movements]] as well as the black liberation movements such as the [[Social:Black Panther Party|Black Panther Party]].<ref name=Pearson>{{cite book |last=Pearson |first=Hugh |title=The Shadow of the Panther: Huey Newton and the Price of Black Power in America |year=1994 |publisher=Perseus Books |isbn=978-0201483413 |page=152}}</ref> While initially formed in opposition to the "Old Left" Democratic Party, groups composing the New Left gradually became central players in the Democratic coalition.<ref name="Carmines and Layman"/>

==== Protests of 1968 ====
The protests of 1968 represented a worldwide escalation of social conflicts, predominantly characterised by popular rebellions against military, capitalist and bureaucratic elites who responded with an escalation of [[Social:Political repression|political repression]]. These protests marked a turning point for the civil rights movement in the United States which produced revolutionary movements like the [[Social:Black Panther Party|Black Panther Party]]. The prominent civil rights leader [[Biography:Martin Luther King Jr.|Martin Luther King Jr.]] organised the "Poor People's Campaign" to address issues of economic justice,<ref>{{cite book |title=The Other American: The Life of Michael Harrington |last=Isserman |first=Maurice |page=[https://archive.org/details/otheramericanlif0000isse/page/281 281] |isbn=978-158648-0363 |publisher=Public Affairs |year=2001 |url=https://archive.org/details/otheramericanlif0000isse/page/281}}</ref> while personally showing sympathy with democratic socialism.<ref>"There must be a better distribution of wealth, and maybe America must move toward a democratic socialism."{{cite book |title=Liberating Visions: Human Fulfillment and Social Justice in African-American Thought |last=Franklin |first=Robert Michael |page=125 |publisher=Fortress Press |year=1990 |isbn=978-080062392-0}}</ref> In reaction to the Tet Offensive, protests also sparked a broad movement in opposition to the Vietnam War all over the United States and even into London, Paris, Berlin and Rome. In 1968, the International of Anarchist Federations was founded during a conference held in Carrara by the three existing European federations of France, the Italian and the [[Social:Federación Anarquista Ibérica|Iberian Anarchist Federation]] as well as the Bulgarian federation in French exile.

Mass socialist movements grew not only in the United States, but also in most European countries. In many other capitalist countries, struggles against dictatorships, state repression and colonisation were also marked by protests in 1968, such as the Tlatelolco massacre in Mexico City and the escalation of guerrilla warfare against the [[Social:Military dictatorship in Brazil|military dictatorship in Brazil]].

Countries governed by Communist parties saw protests against bureaucratic and military elites too. In Eastern Europe, widespread protests escalated particularly in the Prague Spring in Czechoslovakia. In response, Soviet Union occupied Czechoslovakia. The occupation was denounced by the Italian and French<ref name="OSA">{{cite web |last=Devlin |first=Kevin |publisher=Blinken Open Society Archives |title=Western CPs Condemn Invasion, Hail Prague Spring |url=https://catalog.osaarchivum.org/catalog/osa:08b8f6ba-5995-4e41-9f9c-093e944891d2 |access-date=8 September 2021 |archive-date=8 September 2021 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20210908084815/https://catalog.osaarchivum.org/catalog/osa:08b8f6ba-5995-4e41-9f9c-093e944891d2 |url-status=dead }}</ref> Communist parties and the Communist Party of Finland, but defended by the Portuguese Communist Party secretary-general Álvaro Cunhal<ref>Andrew, Mitrokhin (2005), p. 444</ref> the Communist Party of Luxembourg<ref name="OSA"/> and conservative factions of the Communist Party of Greece.<ref name="OSA"/>

In the Chinese Cultural Revolution, a socio-political youth movement mobilised against "bourgeois" elements which were seen to be infiltrating the government and society at large, aiming to restore capitalism. This movement motivated [[Philosophy:Maoism|Maoism]]-[[Philosophy:Maoism#International influence|inspired movements around the world]] in the context of the Sino-Soviet split.

=== Late 20th century ===
[[File:Salvador Allende 2.jpg|thumb|Salvador Allende, President of Chile and member of the Socialist Party of Chile, whose presidency and life were ended by a CIA-backed military coup<ref>{{cite book |title=A Brief History of Neoliberalism |last=Harvey |first=David |isbn=978-0199283279 |publisher=Oxford University Press |url=https://global.oup.com/academic/product/a-brief-history-of-neoliberalism-9780199283279?cc=us&lang=en& |year=2005 |page=7}}</ref>]]
In the 1960s, a socialist tendency within the Latin American Catholic church appeared and was known as [[Religion:Liberation theology|liberation theology]]<ref>Richard P. McBrien, ''Catholicism'' (HarperCollins, 1994), chapter IV.</ref><ref>[http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/551569/socialism/276340/Socialism-after-Marx "Socialism"] at ''Encyclopedia Britannica Online''. "One manifestation of this connection was liberation theology—sometimes characterised as an attempt to marry Marx and Jesus—which emerged among Roman Catholic theologians in Latin America in the 1960s."</ref> It motivated the Colombian priest Camilo Torres Restrepo to enter the ELN guerrilla. In Chile, Salvador Allende, a physician and candidate for the Socialist Party of Chile, was elected president in 1970. In 1973, his government was ousted by the United States-backed military dictatorship of [[Biography:Augusto Pinochet|Augusto Pinochet]], which lasted until the late 1980s.<ref>{{cite news |url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/americas/3089846.stm |publisher=BBC |title=Profile of Salvador Allende |date=8 September 2003}}</ref> In Jamaica, the democratic socialist<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.jamaica-gleaner.com/gleaner/20090308/focus/focus4.html |title=Michael Manley: nation-builder |first=Robert |last=Buddan |publisher=Jamaica Gleaner |date=8 March 2009 |access-date=11 January 2012 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120125061311/http://jamaica-gleaner.com/gleaner/20090308/focus/focus4.html |archive-date=25 January 2012}}</ref> Michael Manley served as the fourth Prime Minister of Jamaica from 1972 to 1980 and from 1989 to 1992. According to opinion polls, he remains one of Jamaica's most popular Prime Ministers since independence.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://jamaica-gleaner.com/gleaner/20120812/focus/focus6.html |title=Where Would Jamaica Be Without Michael Manley? |website=Jamaica Gleaner |date=12 August 2012 |access-date=11 March 2013}}</ref>

The Nicaraguan Revolution encompassed the rising opposition to the Somoza dictatorship in the 1960s and 1970s, the campaign led by the Sandinista National Liberation Front (FSLN) to violently oust the dictatorship in 1978–1979, the subsequent efforts of the FSLN to govern Nicaragua from 1979 until 1990<ref>Louis Proyect, ''Nicaragua'', discusses, among other things, the reforms and the degree to which socialism was intended or achieved.</ref> and the socialist measures which included wide-scale agrarian reform<ref>{{cite book |title=Agrarian Productive Structure in Nicaragua |last=Solá Monserrat |first=Roser |date=1989 |pages=69 and ss}}</ref><ref>Louis Proyect, ''Nicaragua'', about 4/5 of the way down.</ref> and educational programs.<ref>{{cite news |first=Juan |last=B. Arrien |title=Literacy in Nicaragua |publisher=[[Organization:UNESCO|UNESCO]] |url=http://unesdoc.unesco.org/images/0014/001459/145937e.pdf |access-date=1 August 2007}}</ref> The People's Revolutionary Government was proclaimed on 13 March 1979 in Grenada which was overthrown by armed forces of the United States in 1983. The Salvadoran Civil War (1979–1992) was a conflict between the military-led government of El Salvador and the [[Social:Farabundo Martí National Liberation Front|Farabundo Martí National Liberation Front]] (FMLN), a coalition or umbrella organisation of five socialist guerrilla groups. A coup on 15 October 1979 led to the killings of anti-coup protesters by the government as well as anti-disorder protesters by the guerrillas and is widely seen as the tipping point towards the civil war.<ref>{{cite book |last=Wood |first=Elizabeth |title=Insurgent Collective Action and Civil War in El Salvador |year=2003 |publisher=Cambridge University Press |location=Cambridge}}</ref>

In 1976, the word socialist was added to the Preamble of the Indian Constitution by the 42nd amendment Act during [[Social:The Emergency (India)|the Emergency]], implying both social and economic equality.<ref>{{cite web |title=The Constitution (Amendment) |url=http://indiacode.nic.in/coiweb/amend/amend42.htm |url-status=dead |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150328040620/http://indiacode.nic.in/coiweb/amend/amend42.htm |archive-date=28 March 2015 |access-date=2016-07-28 |website=Indiacode.nic.in |df=dmy-all}}</ref>

In 1982, the newly elected French socialist government of François Mitterrand nationalised parts of a few key industries, including banks and insurance companies.<ref>James C. Docherty. ''Historical dictionary of socialism''. The Scarecrow Press Inc. London 1997. pp. 181–182</ref> [[Social:Eurocommunism|Eurocommunism]] was a trend in the 1970s and 1980s in various Western European Communist parties to develop a theory and practice of social transformation that was more relevant for a Western European country and less aligned to the influence or control of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union. Outside Western Europe, it is sometimes called neocommunism.<ref name="Definition of Eurocommunism">{{cite web |last=Webster |first=Dictionary |title=Definition of Eurocommunism |url=http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/eurocommunism |website=Dictionary Entry |publisher=Webster's Dictionary |access-date=9 April 2013}}</ref>

Some Communist parties with strong popular support, notably the Italian Communist Party (PCI) and the Communist Party of Spain (PCE). adopted Eurocommunism most enthusiastically and the Communist Party of Finland was dominated by Eurocommunists. The French Communist Party (PCF) and many smaller parties strongly opposed Eurocommunism and stayed aligned with the Communist Party of the Soviet Union until the end of the Soviet Union. Also emerging from the Communist movement but moving in a more left-wing direction, in Italy Autonomia Operaia was particularly active from 1976 to 1978; it took an important role in the autonomist movement in the 1970s, alongside earlier organisations such as Potere Operaio (created after May 1968) and Lotta Continua, promoting a radical form of socialism based on working class self-activity rather than vanguard parties and state planning.<ref>{{cite book |first1=Paolo |last1=Virno |first2=Michael |last2=Hardt |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=AQumJdO6AgIC&pg=PT254 |title=Radical Thought in Italy: A Potential Politics |publisher=Minnesota Press |date=2006 |isbn=978-0816649242 |via=[[Google Books]]}}</ref><ref>Sylvere Lotringer & Christian Marazzi ed. ''Autonomia: Post-Political Politics''], New York: Semiotext(e), 1980, 2007</ref>

Until its 1976 Geneva Congress, the Socialist International (SI) had few members outside Europe and no formal involvement with Latin America.<ref>The Dictionary of Contemporary Politics of South America, Routledge, 1989</ref> In the late 1970s and in the 1980s, the SI had extensive contacts and discussion with the two powers of the [[History:Cold War|Cold War]], the United States and the Soviet Union, about east–west relations and arms control, and admitted as member parties the Nicaraguan FSLN, the left-wing Puerto Rican Independence Party, as well as former Communist parties such as the Democratic Party of the Left of Italy and the Front for the Liberation of Mozambique (FRELIMO). The SI aided social democratic parties in re-establishing themselves when dictatorship gave way to democracy in Portugal (1974) and Spain (1975).

After [[Biography:Mao Zedong|Mao Zedong]]'s death in 1976 and the arrest of the faction known as the Gang of Four, who were blamed for the excesses of the Cultural Revolution, [[Biography:Deng Xiaoping|Deng Xiaoping]] took power and led the People's Republic of China to significant economic reforms. The Chinese Communist Party (CCP) loosened governmental control over citizens' personal lives and the communes were disbanded in favour of private land leases, thus China's transition from a planned economy to a mixed economy named as "socialism with Chinese characteristics"<ref name="Ref_e">Hart-Landsberg, Martin; and Burkett, Paul. [http://www.monthlyreview.org/chinaandsocialism.htm "China and Socialism: Market Reforms and Class Struggle"]. Monthly Review. Retrieved 30 October 2008.</ref> which maintained state ownership rights over land, state or cooperative ownership of much of the heavy industrial and manufacturing sectors and state influence in the banking and financial sectors. China adopted its current constitution on 4 December 1982. Chinese Communist Party General Secretary Jiang Zemin, Premiers Li Peng and Zhu Rongji led the nation in the 1990s. Under their administration, China sustained an average annual gross domestic product growth rate of 11.2%.<ref name="Ref_i">[http://english.people.com.cn/english/200003/01/eng20000301X115.html ''China's Average Economic Growth in 90s Ranked 1st in World'']. ''People's Daily''. 1 March 2000. Retrieved 10 July 2013.</ref>{{Better source needed|date=October 2021}} At the Sixth National Congress of the Communist Party of Vietnam in December 1986, reformist politicians replaced the "old guard" government with new leadership.<ref name="Stowe">Stowe, Judy (28 April 1998). "Obituary: Nguyen Van Linh". ''The Independent'' (London). p. 20.</ref><ref name="Ackland">Ackland, Len (20 March 1988). "Long after U.S. war, Vietnam is still a mess". ''St. Petersburg Times'' (Florida). p. 2-D.</ref> The reformers were led by 71-year-old Nguyen Van Linh, who became the party's new general secretary.<ref name="Stowe"/><ref name="Ackland"/> Linh and the reformers implemented a series of [[Social:Free market|free market]] reforms—known as ''{{lang|vi|Đổi Mới}}'' ("Renovation")—which carefully managed the transition from a [[Social:Planned economy|planned economy]] to a "[[Social:Socialist-oriented market economy|socialist-oriented market economy]]".<ref>Murray, Geoffrey (1997). ''Vietnam: Dawn of a New Market''. New York: St. Martin's Press. pp. 24–25. {{ISBN|031217392X}}.</ref><ref name="Loan">{{cite news |last=Loan |first=Hoang Thi Bich |date=18 April 2007 |url=http://www.tapchicongsan.org.vn/details_e.asp?Object=29152838&News_ID=18459436 |title=Consistently pursuing the socialist orientation in developing the market economy in Vietnam |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110510005305/http://www.tapchicongsan.org.vn/details_e.asp?Object=29152838&News_ID=18459436 |archive-date=10 May 2011 |work=Communist Review |publisher=TạpchíCộngsản.org.vn}}</ref>

[[File:RIAN archive 850809 General Secretary of the CPSU CC M. Gorbachev (crop).jpg|thumb|upright|Mikhail Gorbachev, General Secretary of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union (1985–1991)]]
The Soviet Union experienced continued increases in mortality rate (particularly among men) as far back as 1965.<ref name=rand>{{Cite report|url=https://www.rand.org/pubs/research_briefs/RB5056.html|title=Russia's Mortality Crisis: Drinking, Disease, and Deteriorating Health Care|first1=Julie|last1=DaVanzo|first2=Clifford A.|last2=Grammich|date=1 January 2001|via=www.rand.org}}</ref>{{better source needed|date=September 2021}} [[Biography:Mikhail Gorbachev|Mikhail Gorbachev]] wished to move the Soviet Union towards of Nordic-style social democracy, calling it "a socialist beacon for all mankind".<ref>{{cite book |last=Klein |first=Naomi |date=2008 |title=The Shock Doctrine: The Rise of Disaster Capitalism |publisher=Picador |isbn=978-0312427993 |pages=[https://books.google.com/books?id=PwHUAq5LPOQC&pg=PA276 276]}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |first1=Philip |last1=Whyman |first2=Mark |last2=Baimbridge |first3=Andrew |last3=Mullen |date=2012 |title=The Political Economy of the European Social Model |series=Routledge Studies in the European Economy |publisher=[[Company:Routledge|Routledge]] |isbn=978-0415476294 |pages=[https://books.google.com/books?id=e-M_cdwdgoMC&pg=PA108 108] |quote=In short, Gorbachev aimed to lead the Soviet Union towards the Scandinavian social democratic model.}}</ref> Prior to its dissolution in 1991, the economy of the Soviet Union was by some measures the second largest in the world after the United States.<ref name=cia1990>{{cite web |url=http://www.umsl.edu/services/govdocs/wofact90/world12.txt |publisher=Central Intelligence Agency |access-date=9 March 2008 |title=1990 CIA World Factbook |archive-date=27 April 2011 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110427053700/http://www.umsl.edu/services/govdocs/wofact90/world12.txt}}</ref><ref name=brit>{{cite web |url=https://www.britannica.com/story/why-did-the-soviet-union-collapse |website=Britannica |first=Michael |last=Ray |title=Why Did the Soviet Union Collapse? |access-date=25 September 2021}}</ref><ref>{{cite magazine|url=https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/1990/06/inside-the-collapsing-soviet-economy/303870/ |quote=The peculiar fact is that the Soviet Union produces an enormous abundance of goods. When you look at primary production (in what is still the world's second largest economy), the Soviets come out first globally year after year in things like oil, natural gas, iron ore, and steel. |title=Inside the Collapsing Soviet Economy |first=Richard |last=Parket |magazine=The Atlantic |date=June 1990}}</ref> However, the economy was also beset by economic stagnation, an inflationary spiral, shortages of consumer goods, and fiscal mismanagement.<ref name=brit/> With the collapse of the Soviet Union, the economic integration of the Soviet republics was dissolved and overall industrial activity and economic productivity declined substantially.<ref>{{cite journal |last=Oldfield |first=J.D. |date=2000 |title=Structural economic change and the natural environment in the Russian Federation |journal=[[Finance:Post-Communist Economies|Post-Communist Economies]] |volume=12 |number=1 |pages=77–90 |doi=10.1080/14631370050002684 |s2cid=153496592}}</ref>

A lasting legacy of Communism in Soviet Union remains in the physical infrastructure created during decades of combined industrial production practices, and widespread environmental destruction.<ref>{{cite book |url=https://archive.org/details/troubledlandsleg00pete |title=Troubled Lands: The Legacy of Soviet Environmental Destruction (A Rand Research Study) |first=D. J. |last=Peterson |date=1993 |publisher=[[Organization:Westview Press|Westview Press]] |isbn=978-0813316741 |access-date=3 April 2016 |url-access=registration}}</ref> The transition to capitalist market economies in the former Soviet Union and Eastern Bloc was accompanied by [[Finance:Washington Consensus|Washington Consensus]]-inspired "[[Finance:Shock therapy (economics)|shock therapy]]",<ref>{{cite book |last1=Appel |first1=Hilary |last2=Orenstein |first2=Mitchell A. |date=2018 |title=From Triumph to Crisis: Neoliberal Economic Reform in Postcommunist Countries |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=PHhTDwAAQBAJ&pg=PA3 |publisher={{wipe|Cambridge University Press}} |page=3 |isbn=978-1108435055 |via=[[Google Books]]}}</ref> advocated by Western institutions and economists with the intent to replace state socialism with capitalism and integrate these countries into the capitalist western world.<ref name="Ghodsee/Orenstein195196">{{cite book |last1=Ghodsee |first1=Kristen |title=Taking Stock of Shock: Social Consequences of the 1989 Revolutions |last2=Orenstein |first2=Mitchell A. |date=2021 |publisher=[[Organization:Oxford University Press|Oxford University Press]] |isbn=978-0197549247 |location=New York |pages=195–196 |doi=10.1093/oso/9780197549230.001.0001 |quote=In the mortality belt of the European former Soviet Union, an aggressive health policy intervention might have prevented tens of thousands of excess deaths, or at least generated a different perception of Western intentions. Instead, Western self-congratulatory triumphalism, the political priority to irreversibly destroy the communist system, and the desire to integrate East European economies into the capitalist world at any cost took precedence.}}</ref>

Following a transition to free-market capitalism, there was initially a steep fall in the standard of living. Post-Communist Russia experienced rising [[Social:Economic inequality|economic inequality]] and poverty<ref name="Scheidel2017">{{cite book |last=Scheidel |first=Walter |title=The Great Leveler: Violence and the History of Inequality from the Stone Age to the Twenty-First Century |publisher=Princeton University Press |year=2017 |isbn=978-0691165028 |pages=51, 222–223 |quote=Following the dissolution of the Communist Party of the Soviet Union and then of the Soviet Union itself in late 1991, exploding poverty drove the surge in income inequality: within three years, the proportion of people living in poverty had tripled to more than a third of Russia's population. By the time of the financial crisis of 1998, their share had grown to almost 60 per cent. Yet over the longer term, rising inequality has been boosted by the decompression of wage incomes, much of it resulting from growing regional variation. Strongly disproportionate income growth in Moscow and in oil-and-gas-rich parts of the country point to the successful capture of rents by those in the highest income-brackets. Wealth concentration at the very top had been made possible by the transfer of state assets to private owners.}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |last=Mattei |first=Clara E. |date=2022 |title=The Capital Order: How Economists Invented Austerity and Paved the Way to Fascism |pages=301–302 |url=https://press.uchicago.edu/ucp/books/book/chicago/C/bo181707138.html |location= |publisher=[[Organization:University of Chicago Press|University of Chicago Press]]|isbn=978-0226818399 |quote=If, in 1987–1988, 2 percent of the Russian people lived in poverty (i.e., survived on less than $4 a day), by 1993–1995 the number reached 50 percent: in just seven years half the Russian population became destitute.}}</ref> a surge in excess mortality amongst men,<ref name="Ghodsee/Orenstein195196" /><ref name="rand" /><ref>See:
*[http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/health/7828901.stm Privatisation 'raised death rate']. ''BBC,'' 15 January 2009. Retrieved 24 November 2018.
*{{cite journal |last1=Rosefielde |first1=Steven |date=2001 |title=Premature Deaths: Russia's Radical Economic Transition in Soviet Perspective |journal=Europe-Asia Studies |volume=53 |issue=8 |pages=1159–1176 |doi=10.1080/09668130120093174 |s2cid=145733112 |}}
*{{cite journal |last1=Vlassov |first1=Vasiliy |last2=Vishnevsky |first2=Anatoly |title=Privatisation and mortality in Russia |journal=Public Health |publisher=The Lancet |volume=2 |issue=5 |date=11 April 2017 |pages=e207–e208 |doi=10.1016/S2468-2667(17)30071-3 |pmid=29253482 |doi-access=free}}
*{{cite journal |title=The effect of rapid privatisation on mortality in mono-industrial towns in post-Soviet Russia: a retrospective cohort study |last1=Azarova |first1=Aytalina|last2=Irdam |first2=Darja |last3=Gugushvili |first3=Alexi |last4=Fazekas |first4=Mihaly |journal=Public Health |publisher=The Lancet |volume=2 |issue=5 |date=11 April 2017 |pages=e231–e238 |doi=10.1016/S2468-2667(17)30072-5 |pmid=28626827 |pmc=5459934}}
*{{cite web |url=https://doc-research.org/2018/06/mortality-life-expectancy-post-communist/ |title=Mortality and life expectancy in post-communist countries |website=The Dialogue of Civilizations Research Institute |first=Vladimir |last=Popov |date=5 June 2018 |access-date=27 September 2021 |archive-date=20 August 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200820053727/https://doc-research.org/2018/06/mortality-life-expectancy-post-communist/}}
*{{cite web |title=Final Report Summary – PRIVMORT (The Impact of Privatization on the Mortality Crisis in Eastern Europe) |website=European Research Council |date=31 August 2017 |quote=(...) we believe the findings provide strong evidence for the hypothesis that rapid privatisation contributed to elevated levels of working age male mortality. |url=https://cordis.europa.eu/project/id/269036/reporting |access-date=6 October 2021 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20211006162807/https://cordis.europa.eu/project/id/269036/reporting |archive-date=6 October 2021}}</ref> and a decline in life expectancy,{{sfnp|Ghodsee|2017|pp=63–64}} which was accompanied by the entrenchment of a newly established business oligarchy.<ref name="Scheidel2017" /> By contrast, the [[Place:Central Europe|Central Europe]]an states of the former Eastern Bloc–Poland, Hungary, the Czech Republic and Slovakia–showed healthy increases in life expectancy from the 1990s onward, compared to nearly thirty years of stagnation under socialism.<ref>{{cite web |last=Hauck |first=Owen |date=2 February 2016 |url=https://www.piie.com/research/piie-charts/average-life-expectancy-post-communist-countries-progress-varies-25-years-after |title=Average Life Expectancy in Post-Communist Countries—Progress Varies 25 Years after Communism |website=Peterson Institute for International Economics |access-date=4 January 2021}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |doi=10.1007/s11205-017-1764-4 |title=Convergence or Divergence? Life Expectancy Patterns in Post-communist Countries, 1959–2010 |journal=Social Indicators Research |date=November 2018 |volume=140 |issue=1 |pages=309–332 |last1=Gerry |first1=Christopher J. |last2=Raskina |first2=Yulia |last3=Tsyplakova |first3=Daria|pmid=30464360 |pmc=6223831}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |last=Safaei |first=Jalil |date=31 August 2011 |title=Post-Communist Health Transitions in Central and Eastern Europe |journal=Economics Research International |volume=2012 |pages=1–10 |doi=10.1155/2012/137412 |doi-access=free}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |last=Mackenbach |first=Johan |url=https://www.researchgate.net/publication/234823288 |title=2008 Political conditions and life expectancy in Europe, 1900-2008 |journal=Social Science and Medicine |date=December 2012}}</ref> Bulgaria and Romania followed this trend after the introduction of more serious economic reforms in the late 1990s.<ref>{{cite journal |first1=C. |last1=Dolea |first2=E. |last2=Nolte |first3=M. |last3=McKee |url=https://jech.bmj.com/content/56/6/444 |title=Changing life expectancy in Romania after the transition |journal=Journal of Epidemiology and Community Health |year=2002 |volume=56 |issue=6 |pages=444–449 |doi=10.1136/jech.56.6.444 |pmid=12011202 |pmc=1732171 |access-date=4 January 2021}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |last=Chavez |first=Lesly Allyn |date=June 2014 |url=https://www.researchgate.net/publication/335675821 |title=The Effects of Communism on Romania's Population |access-date=4 January 2021 }}</ref> The [[Finance:Right-libertarianism|right-libertarian]] think tank [[Organization:Cato Institute|Cato Institute]] has stated that the analyses done of post-communist countries in the 1990s were "premature" and "that early and rapid reformers by far outperformed gradual reformers" on GDP per capita, the United Nations Human Development Index, [[Social:Political freedom|political freedom]], and developed better institutions. The institute also stated that the process of privatization in Russia was "deeply flawed" due to Russia's reforms being "far ''less'' rapid" than those of Central Europe and the [[Place:Baltic states|Baltic states]].<ref>{{Cite web |last1=Havrylyshyn |first1=Oleh |last2=Meng |first2=Xiaofan |last3=Tupy |first3=Marian L. |date=12 July 2016 |title=25 Years of Reforms in Ex-Communist Countries |url=https://www.cato.org/policy-analysis/25-years-reforms-ex-communist-countries-fast-extensive-reforms-led-higher-growth#introduction |access-date=7 July 2023 |website=[[Organization:Cato Institute|Cato Institute]] }}</ref>

The average post-Communist country had returned to 1989 levels of per-capita GDP by 2005,<ref>{{cite book |last1=Appel |first1=Hilary |last2=Orenstein |first2=Mitchell A. |date=2018 |title=From Triumph to Crisis: Neoliberal Economic Reform in Postcommunist Countries |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=PHhTDwAAQBAJ&pg=PA36 |publisher={{wipe|Cambridge University Press}} |page=36 |isbn=978-1108435055}}</ref> and as of 2015, some countries were still behind that.<ref>{{cite journal |doi=10.1080/05775132.2015.1012402 |title=After the Wall Fell: The Poor Balance Sheet of the Transition to Capitalism |journal=Challenge |volume=58 |issue=2 |pages=135–138 |year=2015 |last1=Milanović |first1=Branko |s2cid=153398717 |quote=So, what is the balance sheet of transition? Only three or at most five or six countries could be said to be on the road to becoming a part of the rich and (relatively) stable capitalist world. Many of the other countries are falling behind, and some are so far behind that they cannot aspire to go back to the point where they were when the Wall fell for several decades.}}</ref> Several scholars state that the negative economic developments in post-Communist countries after the fall of Communism led to increased nationalist sentiment and [[Place:Communist nostalgia|nostalgia for the Communist era]].{{sfnp|Ghodsee|2017|pp=xix–xx, 134, 197–200}}{{sfnp|Ghodsee|Sehon|2018}}<ref>{{cite news |url=http://www.pewglobal.org/2011/12/05/confidence-in-democracy-and-capitalism-wanes-in-former-soviet-union/ |title=Confidence in Democracy and Capitalism Wanes in Former Soviet Union |date=5 December 2011 |work=Pew Research Center's Global Attitudes Project |access-date=24 November 2018}}</ref> In 2011, ''{{wipe|The Guardian}}'' published an analysis of the former Soviet countries twenty years after the fall of the USSR. They found that "GDP fell as much as 50 percent in the 1990s in some republics... as capital flight, industrial collapse, hyperinflation and tax avoidance took their toll," but that there was a rebound in the 2000s, and by 2010 "some economies were five times as big as they were in 1991." Life expectancy has grown since 1991 in some of the countries, but fallen in others; likewise, some held free and fair elections, while others remained authoritarian.<ref name=":22">{{Cite web |title=End of the USSR: visualising how the former Soviet countries are doing, 20 years on {{!}} Russia {{!}} The Guardian |url=https://amp.theguardian.com/news/datablog/2011/aug/17/ussr-soviet-countries-data |access-date=21 January 2021 |website=amp.theguardian.com}}</ref> By 2019, the majority of people in most Eastern European countries approved of the shift to multiparty democracy and a market economy, with approval being highest among residents of Poland and residents in the territory of what was once [[Place:East Germany|East Germany]], and disapproval being the highest among residents of Russia and {{wipe|Ukraine}}. In addition, 61 per cent said that standards of living were now higher than they had been under Communism, while only 31 per cent said that they were worse, with the remaining 8 per cent saying that they did not know or that standards of living had not changed.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Mitchell |first=Travis |date=15 October 2019 |title=European Public Opinion Three Decades After the Fall of Communism |url=https://www.pewresearch.org/global/2019/10/15/european-public-opinion-three-decades-after-the-fall-of-communism/ |access-date=15 June 2023 |website=Pew Research Center's Global Attitudes Project |language=en-US}}</ref>

Many social democratic parties, particularly after the Cold War, adopted neoliberal market policies including privatisation, [[Finance:Deregulation|deregulation]] and financialisation. They abandoned their pursuit of moderate socialism in favour of [[Social:Economic liberalism|economic liberalism]].<ref>{{cite book |last=Gerstle |first=Gary |date=2022 |title=The Rise and Fall of the Neoliberal Order: America and the World in the Free Market Era |url=https://global.oup.com/academic/product/the-rise-and-fall-of-the-neoliberal-order-9780197519646?cc=us&lang=en& |publisher=[[Organization:Oxford University Press|Oxford University Press]] |page=148 |isbn=978-0197519646 |quote=These parties had themselves once been socialist. But by the 1990s they were increasingly reformist and technocratic in orientation, seen as maintainers of the status quo and no longer able to inspire the masses with dreams of secular emancipation, as parties of the left had been doing for 200 years since the French Revolution.}}</ref> By the 1980s, with the rise of conservative neoliberal politicians such as Ronald Reagan in the United States, Margaret Thatcher in Britain, Brian Mulroney in Canada and [[Biography:Augusto Pinochet|Augusto Pinochet]] in Chile, the Western [[Social:Welfare state|welfare state]] was dismantled from within, but state support for the corporate sector was maintained.<ref>{{cite book |first=Gary |last=Teeple |date=2000 |url=http://www.utppublishing.com/Globalization-and-the-Decline-of-Social-Reform-Into-the-Twenty-First-Century.html |title=Globalization and the Decline of Social Reform: Into the Twenty-first Century |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20150904015242/http://www.utppublishing.com/Globalization-and-the-Decline-of-Social-Reform-Into-the-Twenty-First-Century.html |archive-date=4 September 2015 |publisher=University of Toronto Press |page=[https://books.google.com/books?id=hf6yur35y3QC&pg=PA47 47] |isbn=978-155193-0268}}</ref> In the United Kingdom, Labour Party leader [[Biography:Neil Kinnock|Neil Kinnock]] expelled some Trotskyist members and refused to support the 1984–1985 miners' strike over pit closures. In 1989, the 18th Congress of the SI adopted a new Declaration of Principles, stating: "Democratic socialism is an international movement for freedom, social justice, and solidarity. Its goal is to achieve a peaceful world where these basic values can be enhanced and where each individual can live a meaningful life with the full development of his or her personality and talents, and with the guarantee of human and civil rights in a democratic framework of society."<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.socialistinternational.org/4Principles/dofpeng2.html |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080222070726/http://www.socialistinternational.org/4Principles/dofpeng2.html |title=Socialist International – Progressive Politics for a Fairer World |archive-date=22 February 2008}}</ref>

In the 1990s, the British Labour Party under Tony Blair enacted policies based on the free-market economy to deliver public services via the [[Finance:Private finance initiative|private finance initiative]]. Influential in these policies was the idea of a [[Philosophy:Third Way|Third Way]] between [[Social:Old Left|Old Left]] state socialism and [[Social:New Right|New Right]] market capitalism, and a re-evaluation of welfare state policies.<ref>{{cite book |first1=Jane |last1=Lewis |first2=Rebecca |last2=Surender |title=Welfare State Change: Towards a Third Way? |publisher=[[Organization:Oxford University Press|Oxford University Press]] |date=2004 |pages=3–4, 16}}</ref><ref name="bbc07">{{cite news |url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/uk_politics/298465.stm |title=All aboard the Third Way |work=BBC News |date=19 March 1999}}</ref><ref name="Stephen D. Tansey 2008. Pp. 97">{{cite book |first1=Stephen D. |last1=Tansey |first2=Nigel A. |last2=Jackson |title=Politics: the basics |edition=Fourth |location=Oxon; New York |publisher=[[Company:Routledge|Routledge]] |date=2008 |page=97}}</ref> In 1995, the Labour Party re-defined its stance on socialism by re-wording Clause IV of its constitution, defining socialism in ethical terms and removing all references to public, direct worker or municipal ownership of the means of production. The Labour Party stated: "The Labour Party is a democratic socialist party. It believes that, by the strength of our common endeavour we achieve more than we achieve alone, so as to create, for each of us, the means to realise our true potential, and, for all of us, a community in which power, wealth, and opportunity are in the hands of the many, not the few."<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.labour.org.uk/labour_policies |title=Labour Party Clause Four |publisher=Labour |date=30 October 2008 |access-date=2 June 2010 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20070711081023/http://www.labour.org.uk/labour_policies |archive-date=11 July 2007}}</ref> Left-wing critics of the Third Way argued that it reduced equality to an equal opportunity to compete in an economy in which the rich were growing richer and the poor were becoming more disadvantaged, which the leftists argue is not socialist.<ref name=":1" />

Starting in the late 20th century, the development of a [[Social:Post-industrial economy|post-industrial economy]] in which information and knowledge matter more than material production and labor raised doubts about the continued relevance of socialism, since socialism emerged in response to industrialization under capitalism.<ref name=":1" /> Several scholars argued that socialism was dead in the immediate aftermath of the end of the Cold War. German sociologist and liberal politician Ralf Dahrendorf declared that "socialism is dead, and none of its variants can be revived for a world awakening from the double nightmare of Stalinism and Brezhnevism." [[Biography:André Gorz|Andre Gorz]], a left-wing philosopher, also declared that "As a system, socialism is dead. As a movement and an organized political force, it is on its last legs. All the goals it once proclaimed are out of date."<ref name=":2">{{Cite news |last=Sunkara |first=Bhaskar |date=1 May 2019 |title=This May Day, let's hope democratic socialism makes a comeback |language=en-GB |work={{wipe|The Guardian}} |url=https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2019/may/01/this-may-day-lets-hope-democratic-socialism-makes-a-comeback |access-date=15 June 2023 |issn=0261-3077}}</ref> American economist Robert Heilbroner wrote that "Less than seventy-five years after it officially began, the contest between capitalism and socialism is over: capitalism has won."<ref name=":3" /> However there was also a counter-argument put forward by the socialist political scholars [[Biography:Antonio Negri|Antonio Negri]] and Felix Guattari, who argued that "whether perestroika succeeds in the present form or in a second wave that will inevitably follow, whether the Russian empire endures or not – these are all problems that concern only the Soviets," arguing that the role of socialism in global politics was not tied to the fate of the Soviet Union.<ref name="Negri/Guattari">{{cite book |last1=Negri |first1=Antonio |title=Communists Like Us |last2=Guattari |first2=Felix |date=1990 |publisher=Semiotext(e) |isbn=978-0936756219 |location=New York |pages=173|quote=It is because of this subject with whom we identify that the events of the East pertain to us. Whether Gorbachev mains in power or is removed by Ligachev, whether perestroika succeeds in the present form or in a second wave that will inevitably follow, whether the Russian empire endures or not – these are all problems that concern only the Soviets.}}</ref>

=== Early 21st century ===
{{multiple image
| perrow            = 2
| total_width       = 350
| image1            = Monument people's heroes 2.jpg
| image2            = Austin, TX Demonstrations on 31 May - 49985139338.png
| image3            = 25th April 2014 Socialist Youth (14033740552).jpg
| image4            = Roe v Wade OVERTURNED Protest to defend US Abortion Rights (Melb) (52187111322).jpg
| footer            = Socialism across the world.<br>Top-left: a picture of the red flags found by the Monument to the People's Heroes, China.<br>Top-right: a demonstration in Austin, Texas, US by the Democratic Socialists of America.<br>Bottom-left: a demonstration by the Portuguese Socialist Youth.<br>Bottom-right: a rally for abortion rights in Melbourne, Victoria, Australia being led by members of the Victorian Socialists.
}}
In 1990, the [[Organization:São Paulo Forum|São Paulo Forum]] was launched by the Workers' Party (Brazil), linking left-wing socialist parties in Latin America. Its members were associated with the [[Social:Pink tide|Pink tide]] of left-wing governments on the continent in the early 21st century. Member parties ruling countries included the Front for Victory in Argentina, the PAIS Alliance in Ecuador, [[Social:Farabundo Martí National Liberation Front|Farabundo Martí National Liberation Front]] in El Salvador, Peru Wins in Peru, and the [[Social:United Socialist Party of Venezuela|United Socialist Party of Venezuela]], whose leader Hugo Chávez initiated what he called "[[Social:Socialism of the 21st century|Socialism of the 21st century]]".

Many mainstream democratic socialist and social democratic parties continued to drift right-wards. On the right of the socialist movement, the Progressive Alliance was founded in 2013 by current or former members of the [[Organization:Socialist International|Socialist International]]. The organisation states the aim of becoming the global network of "the [[Philosophy:Progressivism|progressive]], [[Social:Democratic socialism|democratic]], social-democratic, socialist and labour movement".<ref>{{cite web |url=http://progressive-alliance.info/basic-document/ |title=Basic document &#124; Progressive Alliance |publisher=Progressive-alliance.info |access-date=23 May 2013}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.spd.de/scalableImageBlob/84620/data/20121217_progressive_alliance_abschlussstatement-data.pdf |title=A Progressive Network for the 21st Century |access-date=23 May 2013 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140304064047/http://www.spd.de/scalableImageBlob/84620/data/20121217_progressive_alliance_abschlussstatement-data.pdf |archive-date=4 March 2014}}</ref> Mainstream social democratic and socialist parties are also networked in Europe in the Party of European Socialists formed in 1992. Many of these parties lost large parts of their electoral base in the early 21st century. This phenomenon is known as Pasokification<ref>{{cite magazine |url=https://www.economist.com/britain/2018/06/30/why-labour-is-obsessed-with-greek-politics |title=Why Labour is obsessed with Greek politics |magazine=[[Finance:The Economist|The Economist]] |date=30 June 2018}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |last=Henley |first=Jon |title=2017 and the curious demise of Europe's centre-left |language=en-GB |work={{wipe|The Guardian}} |url=https://www.theguardian.com/politics/ng-interactive/2017/dec/29/2017-and-the-curious-demise-of-europes-centre-left |access-date=2 January 2020 |issn=0261-3077}}</ref> from the Greek party PASOK, which saw a declining share of the vote in national elections—from 43.9% in 2009 to 13.2% in May 2012, to 12.3% in June 2012 and 4.7% in 2015—due to its poor handling of the [[Finance:Greek government-debt crisis|Greek government-debt crisis]] and implementation of harsh [[Finance:Austerity|austerity]] measures.<ref>{{cite news |first=Gary |last=Younge |url=https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2017/may/22/jeremy-corbyn-labour-anti-austerity-manifesto |title=Jeremy Corbyn has defied his critics to become Labour's best hope of survival |url-access=registration |work={{wipe|The Guardian}} |date=22 May 2017}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |first=Mark |last=Lowen |url=https://www.bbc.com/news/world-europe-22025714 |title=How Greece's once-mighty Pasok party fell from grace |work=BBC News |date=5 April 2013 |access-date=20 June 2020}}</ref>

In Europe, the share of votes for such socialist parties was at its 70-year lowest in 2015. For example, the Socialist Party, after winning the 2012 French presidential election, rapidly lost its vote share, the Social Democratic Party of Germany's fortunes declined rapidly from 2005 to 2019, and outside Europe the Israeli Labor Party fell from being the dominant force in Israeli politics to 4.43% of the vote in the April 2019 Israeli legislative election, and the Peruvian Aprista Party went from ruling party in 2011 to a minor party. The decline of these mainstream parties opened space for more radical and populist left parties in some countries, such as Spain's Podemos, Greece's [[Social:Syriza|Syriza]] (in government, 2015–19), Germany's [[Social:The Left (Germany)|Die Linke]], and France's [[Social:La France Insoumise|La France Insoumise]]. In other countries, left-wing revivals have taken place within mainstream democratic socialist and centrist parties, as with Jeremy Corbyn in the United Kingdom and Bernie Sanders in the United States.<ref name=":3" /> Few of these radical left parties have won national government in Europe, while some more mainstream socialist parties have managed to, such as Portugal's Socialist Party.<ref>{{cite news |date=2 April 2016|title=Rose thou art sick |newspaper=[[Finance:The Economist|The Economist]] |url=https://www.economist.com/briefing/2016/04/02/rose-thou-art-sick |access-date=2 January 2020 |issn=0013-0613}}</ref>

Bhaskar Sunkara, the founding editor of the American socialist magazine ''Jacobin'', argued that the appeal of socialism persists due to the inequality and "tremendous suffering" under current global capitalism, the use of wage labor "which rests on the exploitation and domination of humans by other humans," and ecological crises, such as [[Earth:Climate change|climate change]].<ref name=":2" /> In contrast, Mark J. Perry of the conservative American Enterprise Institute (AEI) argued that despite socialism's resurgence, it is still "a flawed system based on completely faulty principles that aren't consistent with human behavior and can't nurture the human spirit.", adding that "While it promised prosperity, equality, and security, it delivered poverty, misery, and tyranny."<ref>{{Cite web |last=Perry |first=Mark |date=2016-03-22 |title=Why Socialism Always Fails |url=https://www.aei.org/carpe-diem/why-socialism-always-fails/ |access-date=2023-06-20 |website=American Enterprise Institute – AEI |language=en-US}}</ref> Some in the scientific community have suggested that a contemporary radical response to social and ecological problems could be seen in the emergence of movements associated with [[Earth:Degrowth|degrowth]], [[Social:Eco-socialism|eco-socialism]] and eco-anarchism.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Wiedmann |first1=Thomas |last2=Lenzen |first2=Manfred |last3=Keyßer |first3=Lorenz T. |last4=Steinberger |first4=Julia K. |date=2020 |title=Scientists' warning on affluence |journal=Nature Communications |volume=11 |issue=3107 |page=3107 |bibcode=2020NatCo..11.3107W |doi=10.1038/s41467-020-16941-y |pmc=7305220 |pmid=32561753}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |last1=Hickel |first1=Jason |author-link1=Jason Hickel |last2=Kallis |first2=Giorgos |author-link2=Giorgos Kallis |last3=Jackson |first3=Tim |author-link3=Tim Jackson (economist) |last4=O’Neill |first4=Daniel W. |last5=Schor |first5=Juliet B. |author-link5=Juliet Schor |display-authors=0. |date=December 12, 2022 |title=Degrowth can work — here's how science can help |url= |journal=Nature |volume=612 |issue=7940 |pages=400–403 |bibcode=2022Natur.612..400H |doi=10.1038/d41586-022-04412-x |pmid=36510013 |s2cid=254614532 |access-date=|doi-access=free }}</ref>

== Social and political theory ==
{{main|Social:Types of socialism}}
Early socialist thought took influences from a diverse range of philosophies such as civic [[Philosophy:Republicanism|republicanism]], [[Philosophy:Age of Enlightenment|Enlightenment]] [[Philosophy:Rationalism|rationalism]], [[Philosophy:Romanticism|romanticism]], forms of [[Philosophy:Materialism|materialism]], Christianity (both Catholic and Protestant), [[Philosophy:Natural law|natural law]] and natural rights theory, [[Philosophy:Utilitarianism|utilitarianism]] and liberal political economy.<ref>Andrew Vincent. Modern political ideologies. Wiley-Blackwell publishing. 2010. pp. 87–88</ref> Another philosophical basis for a great deal of early socialism was the emergence of [[Philosophy:Positivism|positivism]] during the European Enlightenment. Positivism held that both the natural and social worlds could be understood through scientific knowledge and be analysed using scientific methods.

[[File:Claude Henri de Saint-Simon.jpg|thumb|upright|[[Biography:Henri de Saint-Simon|Claude Henri de Rouvroy, comte de Saint-Simon]], early French socialist]]
The fundamental objective of socialism is to attain an advanced level of material production and therefore greater productivity, efficiency and rationality as compared to capitalism and all previous systems, under the view that an expansion of human productive capability is the basis for the extension of freedom and equality in society.<ref>''Socialism and the Market: The Socialist Calculation Debate Revisited''. Routledge Library of 20th Century Economics, 2000. p. 12. {{ISBN|978-0415195867}}.</ref> Many forms of socialist theory hold that human behaviour is largely shaped by the social environment. In particular, socialism holds that social [[Philosophy:Mores|mores]], values, cultural traits and economic practices are social creations and not the result of an immutable natural law.<ref>{{cite book |last=Claessens |first=August |title=The logic of socialism |publisher=Kessinger Publishing, LLC |date=2009 |isbn=978-1104238407 |page=15 |quote=The individual is largely a product of his environment and much of his conduct and behavior is the reflex of getting a living in a particular stage of society.}}</ref><ref>Ferri, Enrico, "Socialism and Modern Science", in ''Evolution and Socialism'' (1912), p. 79. "Upon what point are orthodox political economy and socialism in absolute conflict? Political economy has held and holds that the economic laws governing the production and distribution of wealth which it has established are natural laws ... not in the sense that they are laws naturally determined by the condition of the social organism (which would be correct), but that they are absolute laws, that is to say that they apply to humanity at all times and in all places, and consequently, that they are immutable in their principal points, though they may be subject to modification in details. Scientific socialism holds, the contrary, that the laws established by classical political economy, since the time of Adam Smith, are laws peculiar to the present period in the history of civilized humanity, and that they are, consequently, laws essentially relative to the period of their analysis and discovery."</ref> The object of their critique is thus not human avarice or human consciousness, but the material conditions and man-made social systems (i.e. the economic structure of society) which give rise to observed social problems and inefficiencies. [[Biography:Bertrand Russell|Bertrand Russell]], often considered to be the father of analytic philosophy, identified as a socialist. Russell opposed the class struggle aspects of Marxism, viewing socialism solely as an adjustment of economic relations to accommodate modern machine production to benefit all of humanity through the progressive reduction of necessary work time.<ref>{{cite web |last=Russell |first=Bertrand |url=http://www.zpub.com/notes/idle.html |title=In Praise of Idleness |year=1932 |access-date=30 November 2013 |archive-date=22 August 2019 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190822071656/http://www.zpub.com/notes/idle.html}}</ref>

Socialists view creativity as an essential aspect of human nature and define freedom as a state of being where individuals are able to express their creativity unhindered by constraints of both material scarcity and coercive social institutions.<ref>Bhargava. ''Political Theory: An Introduction''. Pearson Education India, 2008. p. 249.</ref> The socialist concept of individuality is intertwined with the concept of individual creative expression. Karl Marx believed that expansion of the productive forces and technology was the basis for the expansion of human freedom and that socialism, being a system that is consistent with modern developments in technology, would enable the flourishing of "free individualities" through the progressive reduction of necessary labour time. The reduction of necessary labour time to a minimum would grant individuals the opportunity to pursue the development of their true individuality and creativity.<ref>{{cite web |last=Marx |first=Karl |url=http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1857/grundrisse/ch14.htm |title=The Grundrisse |year=1857–1861|quote=The free development of individualities, and hence not the reduction of necessary labour time so as to posit surplus labour, but rather the general reduction of the necessary labour of society to a minimum, which then corresponds to the artistic, scientific etc. development of the individuals in the time set free, and with the means created, for all of them.}}</ref>

=== Criticism of capitalism ===
{{main|Social:Anti-capitalism|Philosophy:Criticism of capitalism}}
Socialists argue that the accumulation of capital generates waste through externalities that require costly corrective regulatory measures. They also point out that this process generates wasteful industries and practices that exist only to generate sufficient demand for products such as high-pressure advertisement to be sold at a profit, thereby creating rather than satisfying economic demand.<ref name="Use not profit">{{cite web |url=http://www.worldsocialism.org/spgb/may10/page23.html |title=Let's produce for use, not profit |publisher=Socialist Party of Great Britain |date=May 2010 |access-date=18 August 2015 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100716140329/http://www.worldsocialism.org/spgb/may10/page23.html |archive-date=16 July 2010}}</ref><ref>{{cite magazine |last1=Magdoff |first1=Fred |last2=Yates |first2=Michael D. |url=http://www.monthlyreview.org/091109magdoff-yates.php |title=What Needs To Be Done: A Socialist View |magazine=Monthly Review |access-date=23 February 2014 |date=November 2009}}</ref> Socialists argue that capitalism consists of irrational activity, such as the purchasing of commodities only to sell at a later time when their price appreciates, rather than for consumption, even if the commodity cannot be sold at a profit to individuals in need and therefore a crucial criticism often made by socialists is that "making money", or accumulation of capital, does not correspond to the satisfaction of demand (the production of use-values).<ref name="Use not profit"/> The fundamental criterion for economic activity in capitalism is the accumulation of capital for reinvestment in production, but this spurs the development of new, non-productive industries that do not produce use-value and only exist to keep the accumulation process afloat (otherwise the system goes into crisis), such as the spread of the [[Finance:Financialization|financial industry]], contributing to the formation of economic bubbles.<ref>{{cite web |first=Richard D. |last=Wolff |url=http://www.rdwolff.com/content/economic-crisis-socialist-perspective |title=Economic Crisis from a Socialist Perspective &#124; Professor Richard D. Wolff |publisher=Rdwolff.com |date=29 June 2009 |access-date=23 February 2014 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20140228090631/http://www.rdwolff.com/content/economic-crisis-socialist-perspective |archive-date=28 February 2014}}</ref> Such accumulation and reinvestment, when it demands a constant rate of profit, causes problems if the earnings in the rest of society do not increase in proportion.<ref>{{Cite journal|url=https://search.informit.org/doi/10.3316/informit.818838886883514|journal=Australian Socialist|title=What is capitalism|first=Chris|last=Warren|issn=1327-7723 |date=December 2022 |volume=28 |issue=2/3}} </ref>

Socialists view [[Finance:Private property|private property]] relations as limiting the potential of [[Social:Productive forces|productive forces]] in the economy. According to socialists, private property becomes obsolete when it concentrates into centralised, socialised institutions based on private appropriation of revenue''—''but based on cooperative work and internal planning in allocation of inputs—until the role of the capitalist becomes redundant.<ref>{{cite book |last=Engels |first=Friedrich |url=http://www.marxists.org/archive/marx/works/1880/soc-utop/ch03.htm |title=Socialism: Utopian and Scientific |access-date=30 October 2010 |via=Marxists Internet Archive |quote=The bourgeoisie demonstrated to be a superfluous class. All its social functions are now performed by salaried employees.}}</ref> With no need for [[Finance:Capital accumulation|capital accumulation]] and a class of owners, private property in the means of production is perceived as being an outdated form of economic organisation that should be replaced by a free association of individuals based on public or [[Social:Common ownership|common ownership]] of these socialised assets.{{sfnp|Horvat|1982|loc=1: Capitalism, The General Pattern of Capitalist Development|pp=15–20}}<ref name="Engels Selected Works 1968, p. 40">{{cite book |title=Marx and Engels Selected Works |first=Lawrence |last=Wishart |date=1968 |pages=40 |quote=Capitalist property relations put a "fetter" on the productive forces}}</ref> Private ownership imposes constraints on planning, leading to uncoordinated economic decisions that result in business fluctuations, unemployment and a tremendous waste of material resources during crisis of [[Finance:Overproduction|overproduction]].{{sfnp|Horvat|1982|p=197}}

Excessive disparities in income distribution lead to social instability and require costly corrective measures in the form of redistributive taxation, which incurs heavy administrative costs while weakening the incentive to work, inviting dishonesty and increasing the likelihood of tax evasion while (the corrective measures) reduce the overall efficiency of the market economy.{{sfnp|Horvat|1982|pp=197–198}} These corrective policies limit the incentive system of the market by providing things such as [[Social:Minimum wage|minimum wage]]s, unemployment insurance, taxing profits and reducing the [[Finance:Reserve army of labour|reserve army of labour]], resulting in reduced incentives for capitalists to invest in more production. In essence, social welfare policies cripple capitalism and its incentive system and are thus unsustainable in the long run.{{sfnp|Schweickart|Lawler|Ticktin|Ollman|1998|pp=60–61}} Marxists argue that the establishment of a socialist mode of production is the only way to overcome these deficiencies. Socialists and specifically Marxian socialists argue that the inherent conflict of interests between the working class and capital prevent optimal use of available human resources and leads to contradictory interest groups (labour and business) striving to influence the state to intervene in the economy in their favour at the expense of overall economic efficiency. Early socialists (utopian socialists and Ricardian socialists) criticised capitalism for concentrating power and wealth within a small segment of society.<ref>{{cite encyclopedia |chapter-url=http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/551569/socialism |chapter=Socialism |encyclopedia=Britannica |date=2009 |access-date=14 October 2009 |quote=Socialists complain that capitalism necessarily leads to unfair and exploitative concentrations of wealth and power in the hands of the relative few who emerge victorious from free-market competition—people who then use their wealth and power to reinforce their dominance in society.|title=Socialism &#124; Definition, History, Types, Examples, & Facts &#124; Britannica}}</ref> In addition, they complained that capitalism does not use available technology and resources to their maximum potential in the interests of the public.<ref name="Engels Selected Works 1968, p. 40"/>

=== Marxism ===
{{main|Philosophy:Marxism}}
{{quote box|quote=At a certain stage of development, the material productive forces of society come into conflict with the existing relations of production or—this merely expresses the same thing in legal terms—with the property relations within the framework of which they have operated hitherto. Then begins an era of social revolution. The changes in the economic foundation lead sooner or later to the transformation of the whole immense superstructure.<ref name="ReferenceA"/>|author=—Karl Marx, ''Critique of the Gotha Program''|align=left|width=246px|bgcolor=#c6dbf7}}
[[Biography:Karl Marx|Karl Marx]] and [[Biography:Friedrich Engels|Friedrich Engels]] argued that socialism would emerge from historical necessity as capitalism rendered itself obsolete and unsustainable from increasing internal contradictions emerging from the development of the [[Social:Productive forces|productive forces]] and technology. It was these advances in the productive forces combined with the old social relations of production of capitalism that would generate contradictions, leading to working-class consciousness.<ref name="ComparingEconomic">{{cite book |title=Comparing Economic Systems in the Twenty-First Century |date=2004 |last1=Gregory |first1=Paul |last2=Stuart |first2=Robert |page=62 |chapter=Marx's Theory of Change |publisher=George Hoffman |isbn=0618261818}}</ref>

[[File:Karl Marx 001.jpg|thumb|upright|The writings of Karl Marx provided the basis for the development of Marxist political theory and Marxian economics.]]
Marx and Engels held the view that the consciousness of those who earn a wage or salary (the working class in the broadest Marxist sense) would be moulded by their conditions of [[Social:Wage slavery|wage slavery]], leading to a tendency to seek their freedom or emancipation by overthrowing ownership of the means of production by capitalists and consequently, overthrowing the state that upheld this economic order. For Marx and Engels, conditions determine consciousness and ending the role of the capitalist class leads eventually to a [[Social:Classless society|classless society]] in which the state would wither away.

Marx and Engels used the terms socialism and [[Social:Communism|communism]] interchangeably, but many later Marxists defined socialism as a specific historical phase that would displace capitalism and precede communism.<ref name="Steele 1992 44-45"/><ref name=Hudis/>

The major characteristics of socialism (particularly as conceived by Marx and Engels after the Paris Commune of 1871) are that the [[Social:Proletariat|proletariat]] would control the means of production through a [[Earth:Socialist state|workers' state]] erected by the workers in their interests.

For [[Philosophy:Orthodox Marxism|orthodox Marxists]], socialism is the lower stage of communism based on the principle of "from each according to his ability, [[Social:To each according to his contribution|to each according to his contribution]]" while upper stage communism is based on the principle of "from each according to his ability, to each according to his need", the upper stage becoming possible only after the socialist stage further develops economic efficiency and the automation of production has led to a superabundance of goods and services.<ref name="KS">{{cite book |last=Schaff |first=Kory |title=Philosophy and the Problems of Work: A Reader|publisher=Rowman & Littlefield |location=Lanham, Md |year=2001 |page=[https://books.google.com/books?id=mdLh5EMehwgC&pg=PA224 224] |isbn=978-07425-07951}}</ref><ref name="WA">{{cite book |last=Walicki |first=Andrzej |title=Marxism and the leap to the kingdom of freedom: the rise and fall of the Communist utopia |publisher=Stanford University Press |location=Stanford, Calif |year=1995 |isbn=978-0804723848 |page=95}}</ref> Marx argued that the material productive forces (in industry and commerce) brought into existence by capitalism predicated a cooperative society since production had become a mass social, collective activity of the working class to create commodities but with private ownership (the relations of production or property relations). This conflict between collective effort in large factories and private ownership would bring about a conscious desire in the working class to establish collective ownership commensurate with the collective efforts their daily experience.<ref name="ReferenceA">{{cite book |first=Karl |last=Marx |chapter=Preface |title=A Contribution to the Critique of Political Economy |date=1859}}</ref>

=== Role of the state ===
Socialists have taken different perspectives on the [[Earth:State (polity)|state]] and the role it should play in revolutionary struggles, in constructing socialism and within an established socialist economy.

In the 19th century, the philosophy of state socialism was first explicitly expounded by the German political philosopher Ferdinand Lassalle. In contrast to Karl Marx's perspective of the state, Lassalle rejected the concept of the state as a class-based power structure whose main function was to preserve existing class structures. Lassalle also rejected the Marxist view that the state was destined to "wither away". Lassalle considered the state to be an entity independent of class allegiances and an instrument of justice that would therefore be essential for achieving socialism.{{sfnp|Berlau|1949|p=21}}

Preceding the Bolshevik-led revolution in Russia, many socialists including reformists, orthodox Marxist currents such as [[Organization:Council communism|council communism]], anarchists and libertarian socialists criticised the idea of using the state to conduct central planning and own the means of production as a way to establish socialism. Following the victory of Leninism in Russia, the idea of "state socialism" spread rapidly throughout the socialist movement and eventually state socialism came to be identified with the Soviet economic model.<ref>{{cite book |last1=Screpanti |first1=Ernesto |last2=Zamagni |first2=Stefano |title=An Outline on the History of Economic Thought |edition=2nd |year=2005 |publisher=[[Organization:Oxford University Press|Oxford University Press]] |quote=It should not be forgotten, however, that in the period of the Second International, some of the reformist currents of Marxism, as well as some of the extreme left-wing ones, not to speak of the anarchist groups, had already criticised the view that State ownership and central planning is the best road to socialism. But with the victory of Leninism in Russia, all dissent was silenced, and socialism became identified with 'democratic centralism', 'central planning', and State ownership of the means of production. |page=295}}</ref>

[[Biography:Joseph Schumpeter|Joseph Schumpeter]] rejected the association of socialism and social ownership with state ownership over the means of production because the state as it exists in its current form is a product of capitalist society and cannot be transplanted to a different institutional framework. Schumpeter argued that there would be different institutions within socialism than those that exist within modern capitalism, just as [[Social:Feudalism|feudalism]] had its own distinct and unique institutional forms. The state, along with concepts like [[Finance:Private property|property]] and taxation, were concepts exclusive to commercial society (capitalism) and attempting to place them within the context of a future socialist society would amount to a distortion of these concepts by using them out of context.<ref>{{cite book |last=Schumpeter |first=Joseph |title=Capitalism, Socialism and Democracy |publisher=Harper Perennial |date=2008 |isbn=978-0-06156161-0 |page=169 |quote=But there are still others (concepts and institutions) which by virtue of their nature cannot stand transplantation and always carry the flavor of a particular institutional framework. It is extremely dangerous, in fact it amounts to a distortion of historical description, to use them beyond the social world or culture whose denizens they are. Now ownership or property—also, so I believe, taxation—are such denizens of the world of commercial society, exactly as knights and fiefs are denizens of the feudal world. But so is the state (a denizen of commercial society).}}</ref>

=== Utopian versus scientific ===
{{main|Social:Scientific socialism|Philosophy:Utopian socialism}}
Utopian socialism is a term used to define the first currents of modern socialist thought as exemplified by the work of [[Biography:Henri de Saint-Simon|Henri de Saint-Simon]], [[Biography:Charles Fourier|Charles Fourier]] and Robert Owen which inspired [[Biography:Karl Marx|Karl Marx]] and other early socialists.<ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.pbs.org/heavenonearth/synopsis.html |title=Heaven on Earth: The Rise and Fall of Socialism |publisher=PBS |access-date=15 December 2011 |archive-date=4 January 2006 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20060104041306/http://www.pbs.org/heavenonearth/synopsis.html}}</ref> Visions of imaginary ideal societies, which competed with revolutionary social democratic movements, were viewed as not being grounded in the material conditions of society and as reactionary.<ref name=Draper>{{cite book |last=Draper |first=Hal |title=Karl Marx's Theory of Revolution, Volume IV: Critique of Other Socialisms |year=1990 |publisher=Monthly Review Press |location=New York |isbn=978-0853457985 |pages=1–21}}</ref> Although it is technically possible for any set of ideas or any person living at any time in history to be a utopian socialist, the term is most often applied to those socialists who lived in the first quarter of the 19th century who were ascribed the label "utopian" by later socialists as a negative term to imply naivete and dismiss their ideas as fanciful or unrealistic.{{sfnp|Newman|2005}}

Religious sects whose members live communally such as the Hutterites are not usually called "utopian socialists", although their way of living is a prime example. They have been categorised as [[Social:Religious socialism|religious socialists]] by some. Similarly, modern intentional communities based on socialist ideas could also be categorised as "utopian socialist". For Marxists, the development of capitalism in Western Europe provided a material basis for the possibility of bringing about socialism because according to ''The Communist Manifesto'' "[w]hat the bourgeoisie produces above all is its own grave diggers",<ref>{{cite book |last1=Marx |first1=Karl |last2=Engels |first2=Friedrich |title=The Communist Manifesto}}</ref> namely the working class, which must become conscious of the historical objectives set it by society.

=== Reform versus revolution ===
{{main|Social:Reformism|Social:Revolutionary socialism}}
Revolutionary socialists believe that a social revolution is necessary to effect structural changes to the socioeconomic structure of society. Among revolutionary socialists there are differences in strategy, theory and the definition of ''revolution''. Orthodox Marxists and left communists take an impossibilist stance, believing that revolution should be spontaneous as a result of contradictions in society due to technological changes in the productive forces. Lenin theorised that under capitalism the workers cannot achieve class consciousness beyond organising into trade unions and making demands of the capitalists. Therefore, Leninists argue that it is historically necessary for a [[Social:Vanguardism|vanguard]] of class conscious revolutionaries to take a central role in coordinating the social revolution to overthrow the capitalist state and eventually the institution of the state altogether.<ref>{{cite web |title=The Leninist Concept of the Revolutionary Vanguard Party |url=http://www.marxists.org/history/etol/newspape/socialistvoice/partyPR46.html |author=Workers Revolutionary Group |via=Marxists Internet Archive |access-date=9 December 2013}}</ref> ''Revolution'' is not necessarily defined by revolutionary socialists as violent insurrection,<ref>{{cite journal |last=Schaff |first=Adam |title=Marxist Theory on Revolution and Violence |journal=[[Philosophy:Journal of the History of Ideas|Journal of the History of Ideas]] |volume=34 |number=2 |date=April–June 1973 |pages=263–270 |doi=10.2307/2708729 |jstor=2708729}}</ref> but as a complete dismantling and rapid transformation of all areas of class society led by the majority of the masses: the working class.

Reformism is generally associated with [[Philosophy:Social democracy|social democracy]] and gradualist [[Social:Democratic socialism|democratic socialism]]. Reformism is the belief that socialists should stand in parliamentary elections within capitalist society and if elected use the machinery of government to pass political and social reforms for the purposes of ameliorating the instabilities and inequities of capitalism. Within socialism, ''reformism'' is used in two different ways. One has no intention of bringing about socialism or fundamental economic change to society and is used to oppose such structural changes. The other is based on the assumption that while reforms are not socialist in themselves, they can help rally supporters to the cause of revolution by popularizing the cause of socialism to the working class.<ref name="Parker">{{cite news |url=http://www.worldsocialism.org/spgb/socialist-standard/2000s/2002/no-1171-march-2002/reformism-or-socialism |title=Reformism – or socialism? |last=Parker |first=Stan |date=March 2002 |work=Socialist Standard |access-date=26 December 2019}}</ref>

The debate on the ability for social democratic reformism to lead to a socialist transformation of society is over a century old. Reformism is criticized for being paradoxical as it seeks to overcome the existing economic system of capitalism while trying to improve the conditions of capitalism, thereby making it appear more tolerable to society. According to [[Biography:Rosa Luxemburg|Rosa Luxemburg]], capitalism is not overthrown, "but is on the contrary strengthened by the development of social reforms".<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.marxists.org/archive/hallas/works/1973/01/reform.htm |title=Do We Support Reformist Demands? |last=Hallas |first=Duncan |work=Controversy: Do We Support Reformist Demands? |publisher=International Socialism |date=January 1973 |access-date=26 December 2019 |via=Marxists Internet Archive}}</ref> In a similar vein, Stan Parker of the Socialist Party of Great Britain argues that reforms are a diversion of energy for socialists and are limited because they must adhere to the logic of capitalism.<ref name="Parker"/> French social theorist Andre Gorz criticized reformism by advocating a third alternative to reformism and social revolution that he called "non-reformist reforms", specifically focused on structural changes to capitalism as opposed to reforms to improve living conditions within capitalism or to prop it up through economic interventions.<ref>{{cite news |url=http://socialistreview.org.uk/363/do-we-need-reform-or-revolution |title=Do we need reform of revolution? |last=Clifton |first=Lois |work=Socialist Review |date=November 2011 |access-date=26 December 2019 |archive-date=24 September 2018 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180924191657/http://socialistreview.org.uk/363/do-we-need-reform-or-revolution |url-status=dead}}</ref>

== Economics ==
{{main|Social:Socialist economics}}
{{quote box
| author = —[[Biography:Albert Einstein|Albert Einstein]], "Why Socialism?", 1949
| align = right
| width = 246px
| bgcolor = #c6dbf7
}}

[[File:Albert Einstein Head.jpg|150px|left|thumb|Albert Einstein advocated for a socialist planned economy with his 1949 article "Why Socialism?"]]

Socialist economics starts from the premise that "individuals do not live or work in isolation but live in cooperation with one another. Furthermore, everything that people produce is in some sense a social product, and everyone who contributes to the production of a good is entitled to a share in it. Society as whole, therefore, should own or at least control property for the benefit of all its members".<ref name="ReferenceB"/>

The original conception of socialism was an economic system whereby production was organised in a way to directly produce goods and services for their utility (or use-value in [[Finance:Classical economics|classical]] and [[Finance:Marxian economics|Marxian economics]]), with the direct allocation of resources in terms of physical units as opposed to financial calculation and the economic laws of capitalism (see [[Finance:Law of value|law of value]]), often entailing the end of capitalistic economic categories such as [[Finance:Renting|rent]], interest, [[Finance:Profit (economics)|profit]] and money.<ref>{{harvp|Bockman|2011|p=20}}: "According to nineteenth-century socialist views, socialism would function without capitalist economic categories—such as money, prices, interest, profits and rent—and thus would function according to laws other than those described by current economic science. While some socialists recognised the need for money and prices at least during the transition from capitalism to socialism, socialists more commonly believed that the socialist economy would soon administratively mobilise the economy in physical units without the use of prices or money."</ref> In a fully developed socialist economy, production and balancing factor inputs with outputs becomes a technical process to be undertaken by engineers.<ref>{{cite book |title=Comparing Economic Systems in the Twenty-First Century |date=2004 |last1=Gregory |first1=Paul |last2=Stuart |first2=Robert |edition=Seventh |chapter=Socialist Economy |publisher=George Hoffman |isbn=978-0618261819 |page=117 |quote=In such a setting, information problems are not serious, and engineers rather than economists can resolve the issue of factor proportions.}}</ref>

[[Social:Market socialism|Market socialism]] refers to an array of different economic theories and systems that use the market mechanism to organise production and to allocate factor inputs among socially owned enterprises, with the economic surplus (profits) accruing to society in a [[Social:Social dividend|social dividend]] as opposed to private capital owners.<ref>{{cite book |last=O'Hara |first=Phillip |title=Encyclopedia of Political Economy, Volume 2 |publisher=[[Company:Routledge|Routledge]] |date=2003 |isbn=978-0415241878 |page=70 |quote=Market socialism is a general designation for a number of models of economic systems. On the one hand, the market mechanism is utilised to distribute economic output, to organise production and to allocate factor inputs. On the other hand, the economic surplus accrues to society at large rather than to a class of private (capitalist) owners, through some form of collective, public or social ownership of capital.}}</ref> Variations of market socialism include [[Philosophy:Libertarianism|libertarian]] proposals such as [[Social:Mutualism (economic theory)|mutualism]], based on classical economics, and [[Finance:Neoclassical economics|neoclassical]] economic models such as the Lange Model. Some economists, such as [[Biography:Joseph Stiglitz|Joseph Stiglitz]], Mancur Olson, and others not specifically advancing anti-socialists positions have shown that prevailing economic models upon which such democratic or market socialism models might be based have logical flaws or unworkable presuppositions.<ref>{{cite book |last=Stiglitz |first=Joseph |title=Whither Socialism? |publisher=The MIT Press |date=1996 |isbn=978-0262691826|quote=.}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |first=Mancur |last=Olson, Jr. |orig-date=1965 |edition=2nd |date=1971 |title=The Logic of Collective Action: Public Goods and the Theory of Groups |publisher=Harvard University Press}} [http://www.hup.harvard.edu/catalog.php?isbn=9780674537514 Description], [http://www.hup.harvard.edu/catalog.php?recid=24500&content=toc Table of Contents], and [https://archive.org/details/logicofcollectiv00olso_0/page/5 preview].</ref> These criticisms have been incorporated into the models of market socialism developed by John Roemer and Nicholas Vrousalis.<ref>{{cite journal |first=John E. |last=Roemer |title=Should Marxists be Interested in Exploitation |journal=Philosophy & Public Affairs |volume=14 |number=1 |date=1985 |pages=30–65}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |last=Vrousalis |first=Nicholas |author-link=Nicholas Vrousalis |year=2023 |title=Exploitation as Domination: What Makes Capitalism Unjust |url=https://global.oup.com/academic/product/exploitation-as-domination-9780192867698?cc=us&lang=en& |location=Oxford |publisher=[[Organization:Oxford University Press|Oxford University Press]] |isbn=978-0-19286-769-8 |access-date=9 March 2023}}</ref>{{when|date=June 2023}}

The ownership of the [[Social:Means of production|means of production]] can be based on direct ownership by the users of the productive property through [[Social:Worker cooperative|worker cooperative]]; or commonly owned by all of society with management and control delegated to those who operate/use the means of production; or public ownership by a state apparatus. Public ownership may refer to the creation of state-owned enterprises, nationalisation, municipalisation or autonomous collective institutions. Some socialists feel that in a socialist economy, at least the "commanding heights" of the economy must be publicly owned.<ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.amazon.com/dp/product-description/068483569X |title=Excerpt from Commanding Heights |website=Amazon |access-date=30 November 2010}}</ref> Economic liberals and right libertarians view private ownership of the [[Social:Means of production|means of production]] and the market exchange as natural entities or moral rights which are central to their conceptions of freedom and liberty and view the economic dynamics of capitalism as immutable and absolute, therefore they perceive public ownership of the means of production, cooperatives and [[Social:Economic planning|economic planning]] as infringements upon liberty.<ref name="milton">{{cite web |url=http://www.sangam.org/taraki/articles/2006/11-25_Friedman_MGR.php?uid=2075 |title=On Milton Friedman, MGR & Annaism |publisher=Sangam.org |access-date=30 October 2011}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |last=Bellamy |first=Richard |title=The Cambridge History of Twentieth-Century Political Thought |url=https://archive.org/details/cambridgehistory00ball |url-access=limited |publisher=Cambridge University Press |year=2003 |isbn=978-0521563543 |page=[https://archive.org/details/cambridgehistory00ball/page/n71 60]}}</ref>

Management and control over the activities of enterprises are based on self-management and self-governance, with equal power-relations in the workplace to maximise occupational autonomy. A socialist form of organisation would eliminate controlling hierarchies so that only a hierarchy based on technical knowledge in the workplace remains. Every member would have decision-making power in the firm and would be able to participate in establishing its overall policy objectives. The policies/goals would be carried out by the technical specialists that form the coordinating hierarchy of the firm, who would establish plans or directives for the work community to accomplish these goals:<ref name="The Political Economy of Socialism, 1982. p. 197">{{harvp|Horvat|1982|p=197}}: "The sandglass (socialist) model is based on the observation that there are two fundamentally different spheres of activity or decision making. The first is concerned with value judgments, and consequently each individual counts as one in this sphere. In the second, technical decisions are made on the basis of technical competence and expertise. The decisions of the first sphere are policy directives; those of the second, technical directives. The former are based on political authority as exercised by all members of the organisation; the latter, on professional authority specific to each member and growing out of the division of labour. Such an organisation involves a clearly defined coordinating hierarchy but eliminates a power hierarchy."</ref><ref>{{harvp|Horvat|1982|p=197}} "The sandglass (socialist) model is based on the observation that there are two fundamentally different spheres of activity or decision making. The first is concerned with value judgments, and consequently each individual counts as one in this sphere. In the second, technical decisions are made on the basis of technical competence and expertise. The decisions of the first sphere are policy directives; those of the second, technical directives. The former are based on political authority as exercised by all members of the organisation; the latter, on professional authority specific to each member and growing out of the division of labour. Such an organisation involves a clearly defined coordinating hierarchy but eliminates a power hierarchy."</ref>

The role and use of money in a hypothetical socialist economy is a contested issue. Nineteenth century socialists including [[Biography:Karl Marx|Karl Marx]], Robert Owen, [[Biography:Pierre-Joseph Proudhon|Pierre-Joseph Proudhon]] and [[Biography:John Stuart Mill|John Stuart Mill]] advocated various forms of [[Social:Labour voucher|labour voucher]]s or labour credits, which like money would be used to acquire articles of consumption, but unlike money they are unable to become [[Social:Financial capital|capital]] and would not be used to allocate resources within the production process. Bolshevik revolutionary [[Biography:Leon Trotsky|Leon Trotsky]] argued that money could not be arbitrarily abolished following a socialist revolution. Money had to exhaust its "historic mission", meaning it would have to be used until its function became redundant, eventually being transformed into bookkeeping receipts for statisticians and only in the more distant future would money not be required for even that role.<ref>{{cite book |first=Leon |last=Trotsky |chapter-url=http://www.marxists.org/archive/trotsky/1936/revbet/ch04.htm |title=The Revolution Betrayed |date=1936 |chapter=4: The Struggle for Productivity of Labor |quote=Having lost its ability to bring happiness or trample men in the dust, money will turn into mere bookkeeping receipts for the convenience of statisticians and for planning purposes. In the still more distant future, probably these receipts will not be needed. |via=Marxists Internet Archive}}</ref>

=== Planned economy ===
{{main|Social:Planned economy}}
A planned economy is a type of economy consisting of a mixture of public ownership of the means of production and the coordination of production and distribution through [[Social:Economic planning|economic planning]]. A planned economy can be either decentralised or centralised. [[Finance:Enrico Barone|Enrico Barone]] provided a comprehensive theoretical framework for a planned socialist economy. In his model, assuming perfect computation techniques, simultaneous equations relating inputs and outputs to ratios of equivalence would provide appropriate valuations to balance supply and demand.<ref>{{cite book |last1=Gregory |first1=Paul |last2=Stuart |first2=Robert |title=Comparing Economic Systems in the Twenty-First Century |edition=Seventh |publisher=George Hoffman |year=2004 |isbn=978-0618261819 |pages=120–121}}</ref>

The most prominent example of a planned economy was the economic system of the Soviet Union and as such the centralised-planned economic model is usually associated with the [[Social:Communist state|communist state]]s of the 20th century, where it was combined with a single-party political system. In a centrally planned economy, decisions regarding the quantity of goods and services to be produced are planned in advance by a planning agency (see also the analysis of Soviet-type economic planning). The economic systems of the Soviet Union and the Eastern Bloc are further classified as "command economies", which are defined as systems where economic coordination is undertaken by commands, directives and production targets.<ref>{{cite web |last=Ericson |first=Richard E. |title=Command Economy |url=http://econ.la.psu.edu/~bickes/rickcommand.pdf |access-date=9 March 2012 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20111125010605/http://econ.la.psu.edu/~bickes/rickcommand.pdf |archive-date=25 November 2011}}</ref> Studies by economists of various political persuasions on the actual functioning of the Soviet economy indicate that it was not actually a planned economy. Instead of conscious planning, the Soviet economy was based on a process whereby the plan was modified by localised agents and the original plans went largely unfulfilled. Planning agencies, ministries and enterprises all adapted and bargained with each other during the formulation of the plan as opposed to following a plan passed down from a higher authority, leading some economists to suggest that planning did not actually take place within the Soviet economy and that a better description would be an "administered" or "managed" economy.<ref>{{harvp|Nove|1991|p=[https://archive.org/details/economicsoffeasi00nove/page/78 78]}} "Several authors of the most diverse political views have stated that there is in fact no planning in the Soviet Union: Eugene Zaleski, J. Wilhelm, Hillel Ticktin. They all in their very different ways note the fact that plans are often (usually) unfulfilled, that information flows are distorted, that plan-instructions are the subject of bargaining, that there are many distortions and inconsistencies, indeed that (as many sources attest) plans are frequently altered within the period to which they are supposed to apply ... ."</ref>

Although central planning was largely supported by Marxist–Leninists, some factions within the Soviet Union before the rise of [[Social:Stalinism|Stalinism]] held positions contrary to central planning. Leon Trotsky rejected central planning in favour of decentralised planning. He argued that central planners, regardless of their intellectual capacity, would be unable to coordinate effectively all economic activity within an economy because they operated without the input and tacit knowledge embodied by the participation of the millions of people in the economy. As a result, central planners would be unable to respond to local economic conditions.<ref>{{cite book |last=Trotsky |first=Leon |title=Writings of Leon Trotsky, 1932–33 |date=1972 |publisher=Pathfinder Press |isbn=9780873482288 |page=96}}Trotsky.</ref> [[Philosophy:State socialism|State socialism]] is unfeasible in this view because information cannot be aggregated by a central body and effectively used to formulate a plan for an entire economy, because doing so would result in [[Social:Economic calculation problem|distorted or absent price signals]].<ref name="hayek">{{cite book |first=F. A. |last=Hayek |author-link=Friedrich Hayek |date=1935 |chapter=The Nature and History of the Problem |editor-first=F. A. |editor-last=Hayek |title=Collectivist Economic Planning |pages=1–40}}, and {{cite book |first=F. A. |last=Hayek |author-link=Friedrich Hayek |date=1935 |chapter=The Present State of the Debate |editor-first=F. A. |editor-last=Hayek |editor-link=Friedrich Hayek |title=Collectivist Economic Planning |pages=201–243}}</ref>

=== Self-managed economy ===

{{quote box|quote=Socialism, you see, is a bird with two wings. The definition is 'social ownership and democratic control of the instruments and means of production.'{{sfnp|Sinclair|1918}}|author=—[[Biography:Upton Sinclair|Upton Sinclair]]|align=right|width=246px|bgcolor=#c6dbf7}}

A self-managed, decentralised economy is based on autonomous self-regulating economic units and a decentralised mechanism of resource allocation and decision-making. This model has found support in notable classical and neoclassical economists including Alfred Marshall, [[Biography:John Stuart Mill|John Stuart Mill]] and Jaroslav Vanek. There are numerous variations of self-management, including labour-managed firms and worker-managed firms. The goals of self-management are to eliminate exploitation and reduce [[Philosophy:Social alienation|alienation]].<ref>{{cite book |last=O'Hara |first=Phillip |title=Encyclopedia of Political Economy, Volume 2 |publisher=[[Company:Routledge|Routledge]] |date=2003 |isbn=978-0415241878 |pages=8–9 |quote=One finds favorable opinions of cooperatives also among other great economists of the past, such as, for example, John Stuart Mill and Alfred Marshall...In eliminating the domination of capital over labour, firms run by workers eliminate capitalist exploitation and reduce alienation.}}</ref> [[Social:Guild socialism|Guild socialism]] is a political movement advocating [[Social:Workers' control|workers' control]] of industry through the medium of trade-related guilds "in an implied contractual relationship with the public".<ref name="britannica.com">{{cite encyclopedia |url=http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/248652/Guild-Socialism |title=Guild Socialism |encyclopedia=Britannica.com |access-date=11 October 2013}}</ref> It originated in the United Kingdom and was at its most influential in the first quarter of the 20th century.<ref name="britannica.com"/> It was strongly associated with G. D. H. Cole and influenced by the ideas of William Morris.

[[File:CyberSyn-render-106.png|right|250px|thumb|[[Project Cybersyn|Project Cybersyn]] was an early form of computational economic planning.]]

One such system is the cooperative economy, a largely free [[Finance:Market economy|market economy]] in which workers manage the firms and democratically determine remuneration levels and labour divisions. Productive resources would be legally owned by the [[Finance:Cooperative|cooperative]] and rented to the workers, who would enjoy usufruct rights.<ref>Vanek, Jaroslav, ''The Participatory Economy'' (Ithaca, NY.: Cornell University Press, 1971).</ref> Another form of decentralised planning is the use of [[Cybernetics|cybernetics]], or the use of computers to manage the allocation of economic inputs. The socialist-run government of Salvador Allende in Chile experimented with [[Project Cybersyn]], a real-time information bridge between the government, state enterprises and consumers.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.cybersyn.cl/ingles/cybersyn/cybernet.html |title=CYBERSYN/Cybernetic Synergy |publisher=Cybersyn.cl |access-date=30 October 2011}}</ref> Another, more recent variant is [[Social:Participatory economics|participatory economics]], wherein the economy is planned by decentralised councils of workers and consumers. Workers would be remunerated solely according to effort and sacrifice, so that those engaged in dangerous, uncomfortable and strenuous work would receive the highest incomes and could thereby work less.<ref>{{cite book |last1=Albert |first1=Michael |last2=Hahnel |first2=Robin |title=The Political Economy of Participatory Economics |location=Princeton, NJ. |publisher=Princeton University Press |date=1991}}</ref> A contemporary model for a self-managed, non-market socialism is Pat Devine's model of negotiated coordination. Negotiated coordination is based upon social ownership by those affected by the use of the assets involved, with decisions made by those at the most localised level of production.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://gesd.free.fr/devine.pdf |title=Participatory Planning Through Negotiated Coordination |access-date=30 October 2011}}</ref>

Michel Bauwens identifies the emergence of the open software movement and [[Social:Social peer-to-peer processes|peer-to-peer production]] as a new alternative [[Social:Mode of production|mode of production]] to the capitalist economy and centrally planned economy that is based on collaborative self-management, common ownership of resources and the production of use-values through the free cooperation of producers who have access to distributed capital.<ref name="Ctheory">{{cite news |url=http://www.ctheory.net/articles.aspx?id=499 |title=The Political Economy of Peer Production |date=12 January 2005 |publisher=CTheory |access-date=8 June 2011 |archive-date=14 April 2019 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190414192527/http://www.ctheory.net/articles.aspx?id=499}}</ref>

[[Social:Anarcho-communism|Anarcho-communism]] is a theory of [[Social:Anarchism|anarchism]] which advocates the abolition of the [[Earth:State (polity)|state]], [[Finance:Private property|private property]] and capitalism in favour of [[Social:Common ownership|common ownership]] of the [[Social:Means of production|means of production]].<ref name=Mayne>{{cite book |first=Alan James |last=Mayne |title=From Politics Past to Politics Future: An Integrated Analysis of Current and Emergent Paradigms |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=6MkTz6Rq7wUC&pg=PA131 |year=1999 |publisher=Greenwood Publishing Group |isbn=978-027596151-0 |page=131 |via=[[Google Books]]}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=jeiudz5sBV4C&pg=PA14 |title=Anarchism for Know-It-Alls |publisher=Filiquarian Publishing |year=2008 |isbn=978-1599862187 |via=[[Google Books]]}}{{Dead link|date=January 2023 |bot=InternetArchiveBot |fix-attempted=yes}}</ref> [[Social:Anarcho-syndicalism|Anarcho-syndicalism]] was practised in Catalonia and other places in the Spanish Revolution during the Spanish Civil War. Sam Dolgoff estimated that about eight million people participated directly or at least indirectly in the Spanish Revolution.<ref name=Dolgoff1974>{{citation |last=Dolgoff |first=S. |title=The Anarchist Collectives: Workers' Self-Management in the Spanish Revolution |year=1974 |isbn=978-0914156-031 |title-link=The Anarchist Collectives|publisher=Free Life Editions }}</ref>

The economy of the former Socialist Federal Republic of Yugoslavia established a [[Philosophy:Socialist self-management|system]] based on market-based allocation, social ownership of the means of production and self-management within firms. This system substituted Yugoslavia's Soviet-type central planning with a decentralised, self-managed system after reforms in 1953.<ref>{{cite journal |last=Estrin |first=Saul |date=1991 |title=Yugoslavia: The Case of Self-Managing Market Socialism |journal=[[Finance:Journal of Economic Perspectives|Journal of Economic Perspectives]] |volume=5 |number=4 |pages=187–194 |doi=10.1257/jep.5.4.187|doi-access=free }}</ref>

The [[Finance:Marxian economics|Marxian economist]] [[Biography:Richard D. Wolff|Richard D. Wolff]] argues that "re-organising production so that workers become collectively self-directed at their work-sites" not only moves society beyond both capitalism and [[Philosophy:State socialism|state socialism]] of the last century, but would also mark another milestone in human history, similar to earlier transitions out of slavery and feudalism.<ref>{{cite book |last=Wollf |first=Richard |date=2012 |url=http://www.democracyatwork.info/ |title=Democracy at Work: A Cure for Capitalism |publisher=[[Company:Haymarket Books|Haymarket Books]] |isbn=978-1608462476 |pages=[https://books.google.com/books?id=-QnzAAAAQBAJ&pg=PA13 13–14] |quote=The disappearances of slaves and masters and lords and serfs would now be replicated by the disappearance of capitalists and workers. Such oppositional categories would no longer apply to the relationships of production, Instead, workers would become their own collective bosses. The two categories—employer and employee—would be integrated in the same individuals.}}</ref> As an example, Wolff claims that Mondragon is "a stunningly successful alternative to the capitalist organisation of production".<ref>{{cite news |last=Wollf |first=Richard |author-link=Richard D. Wolff |date=24 June 2012 |url=https://www.theguardian.com/commentisfree/2012/jun/24/alternative-capitalism-mondragon |title=Yes, there is an alternative to capitalism: Mondragon shows the way |work={{wipe|The Guardian}} |access-date=12 August 2013}}</ref>

=== State-directed economy ===
{{main|Philosophy:State socialism}}
State socialism can be used to classify any variety of socialist philosophies that advocates the ownership of the [[Social:Means of production|means of production]] by the [[Earth:State (polity)|state apparatus]], either as a transitional stage between capitalism and socialism, or as an end-goal in itself. Typically, it refers to a form of technocratic management, whereby technical specialists administer or manage economic enterprises on behalf of society and the public interest instead of workers' councils or workplace democracy.

A state-directed economy may refer to a type of mixed economy consisting of public ownership over large industries, as promoted by various Social democratic political parties during the 20th century. This ideology influenced the policies of the British Labour Party during Clement Attlee's administration. In the biography of the 1945 United Kingdom Labour Party Prime Minister Clement Attlee, Francis Beckett states: "[T]he government ... wanted what would become known as a mixed economy."{{sfnp|Beckett|2007}}

Nationalisation in the United Kingdom was achieved through compulsory purchase of the industry (i.e. with compensation). British Aerospace was a combination of major aircraft companies British Aircraft Corporation, Hawker Siddeley and others. British Shipbuilders was a combination of the major shipbuilding companies including [[Company:Cammell Laird|Cammell Laird]], Govan Shipbuilders, [[Company:Swan Hunter|Swan Hunter]] and [[Company:Yarrow Shipbuilders|Yarrow Shipbuilders]], whereas the nationalisation of the coal mines in 1947 created a coal board charged with running the coal industry commercially so as to be able to meet the interest payable on the bonds which the former mine owners' shares had been converted into.<ref>{{cite book |title=The Strike Weapon: Lessons of the Miners' Strike |publisher=Socialist Party of Great Britain |location=London |year=1985 |url=http://www.worldsocialism.org/spgb/pdf/ms.pdf |access-date=28 April 2007 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20070614065637/http://www.worldsocialism.org/spgb/pdf/ms.pdf |archive-date=14 June 2007}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |last=Hardcastle |first=Edgar |title=The Nationalisation of the Railways |journal=Socialist Standard |volume=43 |issue=1 |year=1947 |url=http://www.marxists.org/archive/hardcastle/1947/02/railways.htm |access-date=28 April 2007 |via=Marxists Internet Archive}}</ref>

=== Market socialism ===
{{main|Social:Market socialism}}
Market socialism consists of publicly owned or cooperatively owned enterprises operating in a [[Finance:Market economy|market economy]]. It is a system that uses the market and [[Finance:Price system|monetary prices]] for the allocation and accounting of the [[Social:Means of production|means of production]], thereby retaining the process of [[Finance:Capital accumulation|capital accumulation]]. The profit generated would be used to directly remunerate employees, collectively sustain the enterprise or finance public institutions.<ref>{{cite book |title=Comparing Economic Systems in the Twenty-First Century |date=2003 |last1=Gregory |first1=Paul |last2=Stuart |first2=Robert |chapter=Marx's Theory of Change |publisher=George Hoffman |isbn=0618261818 |page=142 |quote=It is an economic system that combines social ownership of capital with market allocation of capital...The state owns the means of production, and returns accrue to society at large.}}</ref> In state-oriented forms of market socialism, in which state enterprises attempt to maximise profit, the profits can be used to fund government programs and services through a [[Social:Social dividend|social dividend]], eliminating or greatly diminishing the need for various forms of taxation that exist in capitalist systems. Neoclassical economist [[Biography:Léon Walras|Léon Walras]] believed that a socialist economy based on state ownership of land and natural resources would provide a means of public finance to make income taxes unnecessary.<ref>{{harvp|Bockman|2011|p=21}} "For Walras, socialism would provide the necessary institutions for free competition and social justice. Socialism, in Walras's view, entailed state ownership of land and natural resources and the abolition of income taxes. As owner of land and natural resources, the state could then lease these resources to many individuals and groups, which would eliminate monopolies and thus enable free competition. The leasing of land and natural resources would also provide enough state revenue to make income taxes unnecessary, allowing a worker to invest his savings and become 'an owner or capitalist at the same time that he remains a worker."</ref> [[Place:Yugoslavia|Yugoslavia]] implemented a market socialist economy based on cooperatives and worker self-management.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Estrin |first1=Saul |title=Yugoslavia: The Case of Self-Managing Market Socialism |journal=Journal of Economic Perspectives |date=1991 |volume=5 |issue=4 |pages=187–194 |doi=10.1257/jep.5.4.187 |doi-access=free }}</ref> Some of the economic reforms introduced during the Prague Spring by Alexander Dubček, the leader of [[Place:Czechoslovakia|Czechoslovakia]], included elements of market socialism.<ref>{{cite book |last=Golan |first=Galia |title=Reform Rule in Czechoslovakia: The Dubcek Era 1968–1969 |date=1971 |publisher={{wipe|Cambridge University Press}} |isbn=9780521085861}}</ref>

[[File:Proudhon-children.jpg|thumb|Pierre-Joseph Proudhon, main theorist of mutualism and influential French socialist thinker]]
Mutualism is an [[Finance:Economics|economic theory]] and anarchist school of thought that advocates a society where each person might possess a [[Social:Means of production|means of production]], either individually or collectively, with trade representing equivalent amounts of labour in the [[Social:Free market|free market]].<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.mutualist.org/ |title=Introduction |publisher=Mutualist.org |access-date=29 April 2010}}</ref> Integral to the scheme was the establishment of a mutual-credit bank that would lend to producers at a minimal interest rate, just high enough to cover administration.<ref>{{cite encyclopedia|last=Miller |first=David |date=1987 |title=Mutualism |encyclopedia=The Blackwell Encyclopedia of Political Thought |publisher=Blackwell Publishing |page=11}}</ref> Mutualism is based on a labour theory of value that holds that when labour or its product is sold, in exchange it ought to receive goods or services embodying "the amount of labour necessary to produce an article of exactly similar and equal utility".<ref>{{Cite book |last=Tandy |first=Francis D. |date=1896 |title=[[Social:Voluntary Socialism|Voluntary Socialism]] |chapter=6, paragraph 15}}</ref>

The current economic system in China is formally referred to as a socialist market economy with Chinese characteristics. It combines a large state sector that comprises the commanding heights of the economy, which are guaranteed their public ownership status by law,<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.chinadaily.com.cn/china/2006-12/19/content_762056.htm |title=China names key industries for absolute state control |website=China Daily |date=19 December 2006 |access-date=2 June 2010}}</ref> with a private sector mainly engaged in commodity production and light industry responsible from anywhere between 33%<ref>{{cite web |url=http://english.people.com.cn/200507/13/eng20050713_195876.html |title=China has socialist market economy in place |publisher=People's Daily Online |date=13 July 2005 |access-date=2 June 2010}}</ref> to over 70% of GDP generated in 2005.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/16/3/36174313.pdf |title=China and the OECD |date=May 2006 |access-date=2 June 2010 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20081010154017/http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/16/3/36174313.pdf |archive-date=10 October 2008}}</ref> Although there has been a rapid expansion of private-sector activity since the 1980s, privatisation of state assets was virtually halted and were partially reversed in 2005.<ref>{{cite web |last=Talent |first=Jim |url=http://www.heritage.org/Research/Reports/2010/01/10-China-Myths-for-the-New-Decade#_ftn23 |title=10 China Myths for the New Decade &#124; The Heritage Foundation |publisher=Heritage.org |access-date=2 June 2010 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100910011308/http://www.heritage.org/research/reports/2010/01/10-china-myths-for-the-new-decade#_ftn23 |archive-date=10 September 2010}}</ref> The current Chinese economy consists of 150 corporatised state-owned enterprises that report directly to China's central government.<ref>{{cite news |url=https://www.forbes.com/2008/07/08/china-enterprises-state-lead-cx_jrw_0708mckinsey.html |title=Reassessing China's State-Owned Enterprises |work=Forbes |access-date=2 June 2010 |date=8 July 2008}}</ref> By 2008, these state-owned corporations had become increasingly dynamic and generated large increases in revenue for the state,<ref>{{cite web |url=http://us.ft.com/ftgateway/superpage.ft?news_id=fto031620081407384075 |title=InfoViewer: China's champions: Why state ownership is no longer proving a dead hand |publisher=Us.ft.com |date=28 August 2003 |access-date=2 June 2010 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110711045431/https://us.ft.com/ftgateway/superpage.ft?news_id=fto031620081407384075 |archive-date=11 July 2011}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=http://ufirc.ou.edu/publications/Enterprises%20of%20China.pdf |title=Today's State-Owned Enterprises of China |access-date=18 November 2009 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110720024533/http://ufirc.ou.edu/publications/Enterprises%20of%20China.pdf |archive-date=20 July 2011}}</ref> resulting in a state-sector led recovery during the 2009 financial crises while accounting for most of China's economic growth.<ref>{{cite news |url=http://news.bbc.co.uk/2/hi/business/8153138.stm |work=BBC News |title=China grows faster amid worries |date=16 July 2009 |access-date=7 April 2010}}</ref> The Chinese economic model is widely cited as a contemporary form of state capitalism, the major difference between Western capitalism and the Chinese model being the degree of state-ownership of shares in publicly listed corporations. The Socialist Republic of Vietnam has adopted a similar model after the Doi Moi economic renovation but slightly differs from the Chinese model in that the Vietnamese government retains firm control over the state sector and strategic industries, but allows for private-sector activity in commodity production.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.vietnamembassy-usa.org/news/story.php?d=20031117235404 |title=VN Embassy: Socialist-oriented market economy: concept and development soluti |publisher=Vietnamembassy-usa.org |date=17 November 2003 |access-date=2 June 2010}}</ref>

== Politics ==
[[File:Socialists in Union Square, N.Y.C..jpg|thumb|Socialists in Union Square, New York City on May Day 1912]]
While major socialist political movements include anarchism, communism, the labour movement, Marxism, social democracy, and syndicalism, independent socialist theorists, utopian socialist authors, and academic supporters of socialism may not be represented in these movements. Some political groups have called themselves ''socialist'' while holding views that some consider antithetical to socialism. ''Socialist'' has been used by members of the political right as an epithet, including against individuals who do not consider themselves to be socialists and against policies that are not considered socialist by their proponents. While there are many variations of socialism, and there is no single definition encapsulating all of socialism, there have been common elements identified by scholars.{{sfnp|Lamb|Docherty|2006|pp=1–3}}

In his ''Dictionary of Socialism'' (1924), Angelo S. Rappoport analysed forty definitions of socialism to conclude that common elements of socialism include general criticism of the social effects of private ownership and control of capital—as being the cause of poverty, low wages, unemployment, economic and social inequality and a lack of economic security; a general view that the solution to these problems is a form of collective control over the [[Social:Means of production|means of production]], distribution and exchange (the degree and means of control vary among socialist movements); an agreement that the outcome of this collective control should be a society based upon [[Social:Social justice|social justice]], including social equality, economic protection of people and should provide a more satisfying life for most people.{{sfnp|Lamb|Docherty|2006|pp=1–2}}

In ''The Concepts of Socialism'' (1975), Bhikhu Parekh identifies four core principles of socialism and particularly socialist society, namely sociality, social responsibility, cooperation and planning.{{sfnp|Lamb|Docherty|2006|p=2}} In his study ''Ideologies and Political Theory'' (1996), Michael Freeden states that all socialists share five themes: the first is that socialism posits that society is more than a mere collection of individuals; second, that it considers human welfare a desirable objective; third, that it considers humans by nature to be active and productive; fourth, it holds the belief of human equality; and fifth, that history is progressive and will create positive change on the condition that humans work to achieve such change.{{sfnp|Lamb|Docherty|2006|p=2}}

=== Anarchism ===
{{main|Social:Anarchism}}
Anarchism advocates [[Social:Stateless society|stateless societies]] often defined as [[Social:Self-governance|self-governed]] voluntary institutions,<ref>{{cite encyclopedia |quote=Anarchism, a social philosophy that rejects authoritarian government and maintains that voluntary institutions are best suited to express man's natural social tendencies. |first=George |last=Woodcock |title=Anarchism |encyclopedia=The Encyclopedia of Philosophy}}</ref><ref>"In a society developed on these lines, the voluntary associations which already now begin to cover all the fields of human activity would take a still greater extension so as to substitute themselves for the state in all its functions." [http://dwardmac.pitzer.edu/anarchist_archives/kropotkin/britanniaanarchy.html Peter Kropotkin. "Anarchism" from the Encyclopædia Britannica] Peter Kropotkin. "Anarchism" from the Encyclopædia Britannica]</ref><ref>{{cite encyclopedia |title=Anarchism |encyclopedia=The Shorter Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy |publisher=[[Company:Routledge|Routledge]] |date=2005 |pages=14 |quote=Anarchism is the view that a society without the state, or government, is both possible and desirable.}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |last=Sheehan |first=Sean |title=Anarchism |location=London |publisher=Reaktion Books Ltd. |date=2004 |pages=85}}</ref> but that several authors have defined as more specific institutions based on non-[[Hierarchy|hierarchical]] free associations.<ref name="iaf-ifa.org"/><ref>{{cite book |quote=as many anarchists have stressed, it is not government as such that they find objectionable, but the hierarchical forms of government associated with the nation state. |first=Judith |last=Suissa |title=Anarchism and Education: a Philosophical Perspective |publisher=[[Company:Routledge|Routledge]] |location=New York |date=2006 |pages=7}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |quote=That is why Anarchy, when it works to destroy authority in all its aspects, when it demands the abrogation of laws and the abolition of the mechanism that serves to impose them, when it refuses all hierarchical organisation and preaches free agreement—at the same time strives to maintain and enlarge the precious kernel of social customs without which no human or animal society can exist. |first=Peter |last=Kropotkin |author-link=Peter Kropotkin |url=http://www.theanarchistlibrary.org/HTML/Petr_Kropotkin__Anarchism__its_philosophy_and_ideal.html |title=Anarchism: its philosophy and ideal |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120318013807/http://www.theanarchistlibrary.org/HTML/Petr_Kropotkin__Anarchism__its_philosophy_and_ideal.html |archive-date=18 March 2012 |via=The Anarchist Library}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |quote=anarchists are opposed to irrational (e.g., illegitimate) authority, in other words, hierarchy—hierarchy being the institutionalisation of authority within a society. |chapter-url=http://www.theanarchistlibrary.org/HTML/The_Anarchist_FAQ_Editorial_Collective__An_Anarchist_FAQ__03_17_.html#toc2 |chapter=B.1 Why are anarchists against authority and hierarchy? |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120615071249/http://theanarchistlibrary.org/HTML/The_Anarchist_FAQ_Editorial_Collective__An_Anarchist_FAQ__03_17_.html#toc2 |archive-date=15 June 2012 |title=An Anarchist FAQ |via=The Anarchist Library}}</ref> While anarchism holds the [[Earth:State (polity)|state]] to be undesirable, unnecessary or harmful,<ref name="definition">{{cite journal |last=Malatesta |first=Errico |title=Towards Anarchism |journal=Man! |oclc=3930443 |url=http://www.marxists.org/archive/malatesta/1930s/xx/toanarchy.htm |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20121107221404/http://marxists.org/archive/malatesta/1930s/xx/toanarchy.htm |archive-date=7 November 2012 |url-status=live |author-link=Errico Malatesta}} {{cite journal |url=https://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20070514.wxlanarchist14/BNStory/lifeWork/home/ |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20070516094548/http://www.theglobeandmail.com/servlet/story/RTGAM.20070514.wxlanarchist14/BNStory/lifeWork/home |archive-date=16 May 2007 |title=Working for The Man |journal=The Globe and Mail |access-date=14 April 2008 |last=Agrell |first=Siri |date=14 May 2007}} {{cite web |url=http://www.britannica.com/eb/article-9117285 |title=Anarchism |year=2006 |website=Encyclopædia Britannica |publisher=Encyclopædia Britannica Premium Service |access-date=29 August 2006 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20061214085638/http://www.britannica.com/eb/article-9117285 |archive-date=14 December 2006}} {{cite journal |year=2005 |title=Anarchism |journal=The Shorter Routledge Encyclopedia of Philosophy |page=14 |quote=Anarchism is the view that a society without the state, or government, is both possible and desirable.}} The following sources cite anarchism as a political philosophy:
{{harvp|McLaughlin|2007|p=59}}; {{cite book |last=Johnston |first=R. |title=The Dictionary of Human Geography |publisher=Blackwell Publishers |location=Cambridge |year=2000 |isbn=978-0631205616 |page=24}}</ref><ref name=slevin>{{cite dictionary |last=Slevin |first=Carl |title=Anarchism |dictionary=The Concise Oxford Dictionary of Politics |editor1-first=Iain |editor1-last=McLean |editor2-first=Alistair |editor2-last=McMillan |publisher=[[Organization:Oxford University Press|Oxford University Press]] |date=2003}}</ref> it is not the central aspect.{{sfnp|McLaughlin|2007|p=28|ps= "Anarchists do reject the state, as we will see. But to claim that this central aspect of anarchism is definitive is to sell anarchism short."}} Anarchism entails opposing [[Philosophy:Authority|authority]] or hierarchical organisation in the conduct of human relations, including the state system.<ref name="iaf-ifa.org">{{cite web |url=http://www.iaf-ifa.org/principles/english.html |title=IAF principles |publisher=International of Anarchist Federations |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120105095946/http://www.iaf-ifa.org/principles/english.html |archive-date=5 January 2012 |quote=The IAF – IFA fights for : the abolition of all forms of authority whether economical, political, social, religious, cultural or sexual.}}</ref><ref name="Brown 2002 106">{{cite book |last=Brown |first=L. Susan |chapter=Anarchism as a Political Philosophy of Existential Individualism: Implications for Feminism |title=The Politics of Individualism: Liberalism, Liberal Feminism and Anarchism |publisher=Black Rose Books Ltd. Publishing |year=2002 |page=106}}</ref>{{sfnp|McLaughlin|2007|p=1|ps= "Authority is defined in terms of the right to exercise social control (as explored in the "sociology of power") and the correlative duty to obey (as explored in the "philosophy of practical reason"). Anarchism is distinguished, philosophically, by its scepticism towards such moral relations—by its questioning of the claims made for such normative power—and, practically, by its challenge to those "authoritative" powers which cannot justify their claims and which are therefore deemed illegitimate or without moral foundation."}}<ref>Individualist anarchist Benjamin Tucker defined anarchism as opposition to authority as follows "They found that they must turn either to the right or to the left,—follow either the path of Authority or the path of Liberty. Marx went one way; Warren and Proudhon the other. Thus were born State Socialism and Anarchism&nbsp;... Authority, takes many shapes, but, broadly speaking, her enemies divide themselves into three classes: first, those who abhor her both as a means and as an end of progress, opposing her openly, avowedly, sincerely, consistently, universally; second, those who profess to believe in her as a means of progress, but who accept her only so far as they think she will subserve their own selfish interests, denying her and her blessings to the rest of the world; third, those who distrust her as a means of progress, believing in her only as an end to be obtained by first trampling upon, violating, and outraging her. These three phases of opposition to Liberty are met in almost every sphere of thought and human activity. Good representatives of the first are seen in the Catholic Church and the Russian autocracy; of the second, in the Protestant Church and the Manchester school of politics and political economy; of the third, in the atheism of Gambetta and the socialism of Karl Marx." [[Biography:Benjamin Tucker|Benjamin Tucker]]. [http://www.theanarchistlibrary.org/HTML/Benjamin_Tucker__Individual_Liberty.html ''Individual Liberty.'']</ref><ref>Anarchist historian [[Biography:George Woodcock|George Woodcock]] report of [[Biography:Mikhail Bakunin|Mikhail Bakunin]]'s anti-authoritarianism and shows opposition to both state and non-state forms of authority as follows: "All anarchists deny authority; many of them fight against it." (p. 9)&nbsp;... Bakunin did not convert the League's central committee to his full program, but he did persuade them to accept a remarkably radical recommendation to the Bern Congress of September 1868, demanding economic equality and implicitly attacking authority in both Church and State."</ref> [[Social:Mutualism (economic theory)|Mutualists]] support market socialism, collectivist anarchists favour workers cooperatives and salaries based on the amount of time contributed to production, anarcho-communists advocate a direct transition from capitalism to libertarian communism and a [[Finance:Gift economy|gift economy]] and anarcho-syndicalists prefer workers' direct action and the general strike.<ref name="McKay 2008"/>

The authoritarian–libertarian struggles and disputes within the socialist movement go back to the First International and the expulsion in 1872 of the anarchists, who went on to lead the Anti-authoritarian International and then founded their own libertarian international, the Anarchist St. Imier International.<ref>Hahnel, Robin (2005). ''Economic Justice and Democracy''. Routledge Press. p. 138. {{ISBN|0415933447}}.</ref> In 1888, the individualist anarchist [[Biography:Benjamin Tucker|Benjamin Tucker]], who proclaimed himself to be an anarchistic socialist and libertarian socialist in opposition to the authoritarian [[Philosophy:State socialism|state socialism]] and the compulsory communism, included the full text of a "Socialistic Letter" by Ernest Lesigne<ref>Lesigne (1887). [http://fair-use.org/liberty/1887/12/17/socialistic-letters "Socialistic Letters"] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200807090418/http://fair-use.org/liberty/1887/12/17/socialistic-letters |date=7 August 2020}}. ''Le Radical''. Retrieved 20 June 2020.</ref> in his essay on "State Socialism and Anarchism". According to Lesigne, there are two types of socialism: "One is dictatorial, the other libertarian".<ref>Tucker, Benjamin (1911) [1888]. ''State Socialism and Anarchism: How Far They Agree and Wherein They Differ''. Fifield.</ref> Tucker's two socialisms were the authoritarian state socialism which he associated to the Marxist school and the libertarian anarchist socialism, or simply anarchism, that he advocated. Tucker noted that the fact that the authoritarian "State Socialism has overshadowed other forms of Socialism gives it no right to a monopoly of the Socialistic idea".<ref>Tucker, Benjamin (1893). ''Instead of a Book by a Man Too Busy to Write One''. pp. 363–364.</ref> According to Tucker, what those two schools of socialism had in common was the [[Finance:Labor theory of value|labor theory of value]] and the ends, by which anarchism pursued different means.<ref>Brown, Susan Love (1997). "The Free Market as Salvation from Government". In Carrier, James G., ed. ''Meanings of the Market: The Free Market in Western Culture''. Berg Publishers. p. 107. {{ISBN|978-1859731499}}.</ref>

According to anarchists such as the authors of ''An Anarchist FAQ'', anarchism is one of the many traditions of socialism. For anarchists and other anti-authoritarian socialists, socialism "can only mean a classless and anti-authoritarian (i.e. libertarian) society in which people manage their own affairs, either as individuals or as part of a group (depending on the situation). In other words, it implies self-management in all aspects of life", including at the workplace.<ref name="McKay 2008">{{cite book |editor-last=McKay |editor-first=Iain |year=2008 |section=Isn't libertarian socialism an oxymoron? |title=An Anarchist FAQ |volume=I |location=Stirling |publisher=AK Press |isbn=978-1902593906 |oclc=182529204}}</ref> Michael Newman includes anarchism as one of many socialist traditions.{{sfnp|Newman|2005}} Peter Marshall argues that "[i]n general anarchism is closer to socialism than liberalism. ... Anarchism finds itself largely in the socialist camp, but it also has outriders in liberalism. It cannot be reduced to socialism, and is best seen as a separate and distinctive doctrine."<ref>Marshall, Peter (1992). ''Demanding the Impossible: A History of Anarchism''. London: HarperCollins. p. 641. {{ISBN|978-0002178556}}.</ref>

=== Democratic socialism and social democracy ===
{{main|Social:Democratic socialism|Philosophy:Social democracy}}
{{quote box|quote=You can't talk about ending the slums without first saying profit must be taken out of slums. You're really tampering and getting on dangerous ground because you are messing with folk then. You are messing with captains of industry. Now this means that we are treading in difficult water, because it really means that we are saying that something is wrong with capitalism. There must be a better distribution of wealth, and maybe America must move toward a democratic socialism.<ref>{{cite book |title=Liberating Visions: Human Fulfillment and Social Justice in African-American Thought |last=Franklin |first=Robert Michael |page=125 |publisher=Fortress Press |year=1990 |isbn=978-0800623920}}</ref><ref>Osagyefo Uhuru Sekou (20 January 2014). [http://america.aljazeera.com/opinions/2014/1/martin-luther-kingsocialismantiimperialism.html The radical gospel of Martin Luther King]. ''Al Jazeera America.'' Retrieved 20 January 2014.</ref>|author=—[[Biography:Martin Luther King Jr.|Martin Luther King Jr.]], 1966|align=right|width=300px|bgcolor=#c6dbf7}}
Democratic socialism represents any socialist movement that seeks to establish an economy based on [[Finance:Economic democracy|economic democracy]] by and for the working class. Democratic socialism is difficult to define and groups of scholars have radically different definitions for the term. Some definitions simply refer to all forms of socialism that follow an electoral, reformist or evolutionary path to socialism rather than a revolutionary one.<ref>This definition is captured in this statement by Anthony Crosland, who "argued that the socialisms of the pre-war world (not just that of the Marxists, but of the democratic socialists too) were now increasingly irrelevant". {{cite journal |first=Chris |last=Pierson |title=Lost property: What the Third Way lacks |journal=Journal of Political Ideologies |date=June 2005 |volume=10 |issue=2 |pages=145–63 |doi=10.1080/13569310500097265 |s2cid=144916176}} Other texts which use the terms ''democratic socialism'' in this way include Malcolm Hamilton ''Democratic Socialism in Britain and Sweden'' (St Martin's Press 1989).</ref> According to Christopher Pierson, "[i]f the contrast which 1989 highlights is not that between socialism in the East and liberal democracy in the West, the latter must be recognised to have been shaped, reformed and compromised by a century of social democratic pressure". Pierson further claims that "social democratic and socialist parties within the constitutional arena in the West have almost always been involved in a politics of compromise with existing capitalist institutions (to whatever far distant prize its eyes might from time to time have been lifted)". For Pierson, "if advocates of the death of socialism accept that social democrats belong within the socialist camp, as I think they must, then the contrast between socialism (in all its variants) and liberal democracy must collapse. For ''actually existing'' liberal democracy is, in substantial part, a product of socialist (social democratic) forces".<ref>{{cite book |last=Pierson |first=Christopher |date=1995 |title=Socialism After Communism: The New Market Socialism |location=University Park, Pennsylvania |publisher=Penn State Press |page=71 |isbn=978-0271014791}}</ref>

Social democracy is a socialist tradition of political thought.<ref>{{cite book |last1=Eatwell |first1=Roger |last2=Wright |first2=Anthony |date=1999 |title=Contemporary Political Ideologies |edition=2nd |location=London |publisher=Continuum |pages=80–103 |isbn=978-1855676053}}</ref>{{sfnp|Newman|2005|p=5}} Many social democrats refer to themselves as socialists or democratic socialists and some such as Tony Blair employ these terms interchangeably.<ref>{{cite book |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=q07jeo_wrk4C&pg=PA86 |title=Social Democratic System |last=Raza |first=Syed Ali |publisher=Global Peace Trust |isbn=978-9699757006 |page=86 |via=[[Google Books]]}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |url={{google books|plainurl=y|id=Ai2BDAAAQBAJ|page=91}} |title=The New Progressive Dilemma: Australia and Tony Blair's Legacy |last=O'Reilly |first=David |year=2007 |publisher=Springer |isbn=978-0230625471 |page=91}}</ref><ref>{{cite news |url=https://www.nytimes.com/2018/07/17/magazine/america-can-never-sort-out-whether-socialism-is-marginal-or-rising.html |title=America Can Never Sort Out Whether 'Socialism' Is Marginal or Rising |last=Gage |first=Beverly |date=17 July 2018 |work={{wipe|The New York Times}} |access-date=17 September 2018}}</ref> Others found "clear differences" between the three terms and prefer to describe their own political beliefs by using the term ''social democracy''.{{sfnp|Brandal|Bratberg|Thorsen|2013|p=7}} The two main directions were to establish democratic socialism or to build first a welfare state within the capitalist system. The first variant advances democratic socialism through reformist and gradualist methods.{{sfnp|Busky|2000|p=8}} In the second variant, social democracy is a policy regime involving a welfare state, [[Social:Collective bargaining|collective bargaining]] schemes, support for publicly financed public services and a mixed economy. It is often used in this manner to refer to Western and Northern Europe during the later half of the 20th century.<ref>{{cite book |last=Sejersted |first=Francis |title=The age of social democracy: Norway and Sweden in the twentieth century |date=2011 |publisher=Princeton University Press |isbn=978-0691147741 |oclc=762965992}}</ref><ref name="Foundations of social democracy, 2009">''Foundations of social democracy'', 2004. Friedrich-Ebert-Stiftung, p. 8, November 2009.</ref> It was described by Jerry Mander as "hybrid economics", an active collaboration of capitalist and socialist visions.<ref>{{cite book |last=Mander |first=Jerry |date=2012 |title=The Capitalism Papers: Fatal Flaws of an Obsolete System |url=https://archive.org/details/capitalismpapers0000mand/page/213 |publisher=Counterpoint |pages=[https://archive.org/details/capitalismpapers0000mand/page/213 213–217] |isbn=978-1582437170 |author-link=Jerry Mander}}</ref> Some studies and surveys indicate that people tend to live happier and healthier lives in social democratic societies rather than neoliberal ones.<ref>{{cite web |url=https://ourfuture.org/20141015/new-study-finds-big-government-makes-people-happy-free-markets-dont |title=New Study Finds Big Government Makes People Happy, "Free Markets" Don't |last=Eskow |first=Richard |date=15 October 2014 |website=OurFuture.org by People's Action |access-date=20 April 2020}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.cnn.com/2013/09/25/opinion/radcliff-politics-of-happiness/index.html |title=Opinion: Social safety net makes people happier |first=Benjamin |last=Radcliff |author-link=Benjamin Radcliff |website=CNN |date=25 September 2013 |access-date=20 April 2020}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.commondreams.org/further/2009/05/11/worlds-happiest-countries-social-democracies |title=World's Happiest Countries? Social Democracies |website=Common Dreams |access-date=20 April 2020|archive-date=7 August 2020 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20200807053534/https://www.commondreams.org/further/2009/05/11/worlds-happiest-countries-social-democracies}}</ref><ref>{{cite journal |last1=Sullivan |first1=Dylan |last2=Hickel|first2=Jason|author-link2=Jason Hickel|date=2023 |title=Capitalism and extreme poverty: A global analysis of real wages, human height, and mortality since the long 16th century|url= |journal=World Development|volume=161 |issue= |page=106026 |doi=10.1016/j.worlddev.2022.106026|s2cid=252315733 |access-date=|quote=...amongst the developed capitalist countries, the social democracies with generous welfare states (i.e., Scandinavia) have superior health outcomes to neo-liberal states like the US. Poverty alleviation and gains in human health have historically been linked to socialist political movements and public action, not to capitalism.|doi-access=free}}</ref>

[[File:Bernstein Eduard 1895.jpg|thumb|upright|Eduard Bernstein|alt=Eduard Bernstein standing next to a chair and looking rightward. He is resting his hand on the chair.]]
Social democrats advocate a peaceful, evolutionary transition of the economy to socialism through [[Philosophy:Progressivism|progressive]] social reform.<ref name=EB>{{cite encyclopedia |url=http://www.britannica.com/EBchecked/topic/551073/social-democracy |title=Social democracy |encyclopedia=Britannica.com |access-date=12 October 2013}}</ref>{{sfnp|Newman|2005|p=[{{google books|plainurl=y|id=kN8llUabGh8C|page=74}} 74]}} It asserts that the only acceptable constitutional form of government is [[Social:Representative democracy|representative democracy]] under the rule of law.{{sfnp|Meyer|2013|p=91}} It promotes extending democratic decision-making beyond political democracy to include [[Finance:Economic democracy|economic democracy]] to guarantee employees and other economic stakeholders sufficient rights of [[Social:Co-determination|co-determination]].{{sfnp|Meyer|2013|p=91}} It supports a [[Philosophy:Mixed economy|mixed economy]] that opposes inequality, poverty and oppression while rejecting both a totally unregulated [[Finance:Market economy|market economy]] or a fully [[Social:Planned economy|planned economy]].<ref>{{cite book |last=Colby |first=Ira Christopher |editor1-last=Dulmus |editor1-first=Catherine N. |editor2-last=Sowers |editor2-first=Karen M. |title=Connecting social welfare policy to fields of practice |date=2013 |publisher={{wipe|John Wiley & Sons}} |isbn=978-1118177006 |oclc=827894277 |page=29}}</ref> Common social democratic policies include universal social rights and universally accessible public services such as education, health care, workers' compensation and other services, including child care and elder care.{{sfnp|Meyer|2013|p=137}} Social democracy supports the trade union labour movement and supports collective bargaining rights for workers.<ref>{{cite book |last=Upchurch |first=Martin |title=The crisis of social democratic trade unionism in Western Europe: the search for alternatives |date=2016 |publisher=[[Company:Routledge|Routledge]] |isbn=978-1315615141 |oclc=948604973 |page=51}}</ref> Most social democratic parties are affiliated with the [[Organization:Socialist International|Socialist International]].{{sfnp|Busky|2000|p=8}}

Modern democratic socialism is a broad political movement that seeks to promote the ideals of socialism within the context of a democratic system. Some democratic socialists support social democracy as a temporary measure to reform the current system while others reject reformism in favour of more revolutionary methods. Modern social democracy emphasises a program of gradual legislative modification of capitalism to make it more equitable and humane while the theoretical end goal of building a socialist society is relegated to the indefinite future. According to Sheri Berman, Marxism is loosely held to be valuable for its emphasis on changing the world for a more just, better future.<ref>{{cite book |last=Berman |first=Sheri |date=2006 |title=The Primacy of Politics: Social Democracy and the Making of Europe's Twentieth Century |publisher={{wipe|Cambridge University Press}} |page=153 |isbn=978-0521817998}}</ref>

The two movements are widely similar both in terminology and in ideology, although there are a few key differences. The major difference between social democracy and democratic socialism is the object of their politics in that contemporary social democrats support a welfare state and unemployment insurance as well as other practical, progressive reforms of capitalism and are more concerned to administrate and humanise it. On the other hand, democratic socialists seek to replace capitalism with a socialist economic system, arguing that any attempt to humanise capitalism through regulations and welfare policies would distort the market and create economic contradictions.<ref>{{cite web |last=Schweickart |first=David |title=Democratic Socialism |website=Encyclopedia of Activism and Social Justice|year=2006|url=http://orion.it.luc.edu/~dschwei/demsoc.htm |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120617235335/http://orion.it.luc.edu/~dschwei/demsoc.htm |archive-date=17 June 2012}} "Social democrats supported and tried to strengthen the basic institutions of the welfare state—pensions for all, public health care, public education, unemployment insurance. They supported and tried to strengthen the labour movement. The latter, as socialists, argued that capitalism could never be sufficiently humanised, and that trying to suppress the economic contradictions in one area would only see them emerge in a different guise elsewhere. (E.g., if you push unemployment too low, you'll get inflation; if job security is too strong, labour discipline breaks down; etc.)"</ref>

=== Ethical and liberal socialism ===
{{main|Philosophy:Ethical socialism|Philosophy:Liberal socialism}}
[[File:R._H._Tawney.jpg|thumb|300x300px|R. H. Tawney, founder of ethical socialism]]
Ethical socialism appeals to socialism on ethical and moral grounds as opposed to economic, egoistic, and consumeristic grounds. It emphasizes the need for a morally conscious economy based upon the principles of altruism, cooperation, and social justice while opposing possessive individualism.{{sfnp|Thompson|2006|pp=52, 58–59}} Ethical socialism has been the official philosophy of mainstream socialist parties.{{sfnmp|1a1=Orlow|1y=2000|1p=190|2a1=Tansey|2a2=Jackson|2y=2008|2p=97}}

Liberal socialism incorporates liberal principles to socialism.{{sfnp|Gaus|Kukathas|2004|p=420}} It has been compared to post-war social democracy<ref name="Adams1998">{{cite book |last=Adams |first=Ian |title=Ideology and Politics in Britain Today |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=_7t714alm68C&pg=PA127 |year=1998 |publisher=Manchester University Press |isbn=978-0719050565 |page=127 |via=[[Google Books]]}}</ref> for its support of a [[Philosophy:Mixed economy|mixed economy]] that includes both public and private capital goods.<ref>{{cite book |last=Pugliese |first=Stanislao G. |title=Carlo Rosselli: socialist heretic and antifascist exile |date=1999 |publisher=Harvard University Press |oclc=1029276342 |page=99}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |last=Thompson |first=Noel W. |title=Political economy and the Labour Party: the economics of democratic socialism 1884–2005 |date=2006 |publisher=[[Company:Routledge|Routledge]] |oclc=300363066 |pages=60–61}}</ref> While [[Social:Democratic socialism|democratic socialism]] and [[Philosophy:Social democracy|social democracy]] are anti-capitalist positions insofar as [[Philosophy:Criticism of capitalism|criticism of capitalism]] is linked to the private ownership of the [[Social:Means of production|means of production]],{{sfnp|Lamb|Docherty|2006|pp=1–2}} liberal socialism identifies artificial and legalistic monopolies to be the fault of [[Philosophy:Capitalism|capitalism]]<ref>{{cite book |last=Bartlett |first=Roland W. |title=The success of modern private enterprise |date=1970 |publisher=The Interstate Printers and Publishers |oclc=878037469 |page=32 |quote=Liberal socialism, for example, is unequivocally in favour of the free market economy and of freedom of action for the individual and recognises in legalistic and artificial monopolies the real evils of capitalism.}}</ref> and opposes an entirely unregulated [[Finance:Market economy|market economy]].<ref name=ref72>{{cite book |last=Bastow |first=Steve |title=Third way discourse: European ideologies in the twentieth century |date=2003 |publisher=Edinburgh University Press |isbn=0748615601 |oclc=899035345}}</ref> It considers both [[Philosophy:Liberty|liberty]] and [[Social:Social equality|social equality]] to be compatible and mutually dependent.{{sfnp|Gaus|Kukathas|2004|p=420}}

Principles that can be described as ethical or liberal socialist have been based upon or developed by philosophers such as [[Biography:John Stuart Mill|John Stuart Mill]], [[Biography:Eduard Bernstein|Eduard Bernstein]], [[Biography:John Dewey|John Dewey]], [[Biography:Carlo Rosselli|Carlo Rosselli]], [[Biography:Norberto Bobbio|Norberto Bobbio]], and [[Biography:Chantal Mouffe|Chantal Mouffe]].<ref>{{cite book |last1=Urbinati |first1=Nadia |last2=Zakaras |first2=Alex |title=J.S. Mill's political thought: a bicentennial reassessment |date=2007 |publisher={{wipe|Cambridge University Press}} |isbn=978-0511274725 |oclc=252535635 |page=101}}</ref> Other important liberal socialist figures include Guido Calogero, Piero Gobetti, Leonard Trelawny Hobhouse, [[Biography:John Maynard Keynes|John Maynard Keynes]] and [[Biography:R. H. Tawney|R. H. Tawney]].<ref name=ref72/> Liberal socialism has been particularly prominent in British and Italian politics.<ref name=ref72/>

=== Leninism and precedents ===
{{main|Social:Authoritarian socialism|Social:Blanquism|Social:Leninism|Social:Trotskyism|Marxism–Social:Leninism}}
[[File:Vladimir Lenin.jpg|thumb|Russian revolutionary, politician, and political theorist Vladimir Lenin in 1920]]
Blanquism is a conception of revolution named for Louis Auguste Blanqui. It holds that socialist revolution should be carried out by a relatively small group of highly organised and secretive conspirators.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.wisdomsupreme.com/dictionary/blanquism.php |publisher=WisdomSupreme.com |title=Definition of Blanquism |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20170629144204/http://www.wisdomsupreme.com/dictionary/blanquism.php |archive-date=29 June 2017 |access-date=25 April 2007}}</ref> Upon seizing power, the revolutionaries introduce socialism.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.newyouth.com/archives/theory/glossary/b.html#Blanquism |website=NewYouth.com |title=entry for Blanquism |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20080821163359/http://www.newyouth.com/archives/theory/glossary/b.html#Blanquism |archive-date=21 August 2008 |access-date=25 April 2007}}</ref> [[Biography:Rosa Luxemburg|Rosa Luxemburg]] and [[Biography:Eduard Bernstein|Eduard Bernstein]]<ref name="bern">{{cite book |first=Vladimir |last=Lenin |chapter=The Vulgarisation of Marxism by Opportunists |chapter-url=http://www.marxists.org/archive/lenin/works/1917/staterev/ch06.htm#s2 |title=The State and Revolution |year=1917 |via=Marxists Internet Archive}}</ref> criticised Lenin, stating that his conception of revolution was elitist and Blanquist.<ref>Rosa Luxemburg as part of a longer section on Blanquism in her ''Organizational Questions of the Russian Social Democracy'' (later published as ''Leninism or Marxism?''), writes: "For Lenin, the difference between the [[Philosophy:Social democracy|Social democracy]] and Blanquism is reduced to the observation that in place of a handful of conspirators we have a class-conscious proletariat. He forgets that this difference implies a complete revision of our ideas on organisation and, therefore, an entirely different conception of centralism and the relations existing between the party and the struggle itself. Blanquism did not count on the direct action of the working class. It, therefore, did not need to organise the people for the revolution. The people were expected to play their part only at the moment of revolution. Preparation for the revolution concerned only the little group of revolutionists armed for the coup. Indeed, to assure the success of the revolutionary conspiracy, it was considered wiser to keep the mass at some distance from the conspirators. Rosa Luxemburg, [http://www.marx.org/archive/luxemburg/1904/questions-rsd/ch01.htm ''Leninism or Marxism?''] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110927072108/http://www.marx.org/archive/luxemburg/1904/questions-rsd/ch01.htm |date=27 September 2011}}, [http://www.marx.org Marx.org] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20110928115854/http://marx.org/ |date=28 September 2011}}, last retrieved 25 April 2007</ref> Marxism–Leninism combines Marx's scientific socialist concepts and Lenin's anti-imperialism, [[Social:Democratic centralism|democratic centralism]] and [[Social:Vanguardism|vanguardism]].<ref>''Marxism–Leninism''. The American Heritage Dictionary of the English Language, Fourth Edition. Houghton Mifflin Company.</ref>

[[Biography:Hal Draper|Hal Draper]] defined socialism from above as the philosophy which employs an elite [[Social:Administration (government)|administration]] to run the [[Earth:Socialist state|socialist state]]. The other side of socialism is a more democratic socialism from below.<ref name="Two Souls">{{cite book |last=Draper |first=Hal |year=1970 |orig-date=1963 |url=http://www.anu.edu.au/polsci/marx/contemp/pamsetc/twosouls/twosouls.htm |title=Two Souls of Socialism |edition=revised |location=Highland Park, Michigan |publisher=International Socialists |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160120133501/http://www.anu.edu.au/polsci/marx/contemp/pamsetc/twosouls/twosouls.htm |archive-date=20 January 2016 |access-date=20 January 2016}}</ref> The idea of socialism from above is much more frequently discussed in elite circles than socialism from below—even if that is the Marxist ideal—because it is more practical.<ref>Young, James D. (1988). ''Socialism Since 1889: A Biographical History''. Totowa: Barnes & Noble Books. {{ISBN|978-0389208136}}.</ref> Draper viewed socialism from below as being the purer, more Marxist version of socialism.<ref>{{cite book |last=Young |first=James D. |title=Socialism Since 1889: A Biographical History |date=1988 |publisher=Barnes & Noble Books |location=Totowa |isbn=978-0389208136}}</ref> According to Draper, [[Biography:Karl Marx|Karl Marx]] and [[Biography:Friedrich Engels|Friedrich Engels]] were devoutly opposed to any socialist institution that was "conducive to superstitious authoritarianism". Draper makes the argument that this division echoes the division between "reformist or revolutionary, peaceful or violent, democratic or authoritarian, etc." and further identifies six major varieties of socialism from above, among them "Philanthropism", "Elitism", "Pannism", "Communism", "Permeationism" and "Socialism-from-Outside".<ref>{{cite book |last=Draper |first=Hal |year=1970 |orig-date=1963 |url=http://www.anu.edu.au/polsci/marx/contemp/pamsetc/twosouls/twosouls.htm |title=Two Souls of Socialism |edition=revised |location=Highland Park, Michigan |publisher=International Socialists |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160120133501/http://www.anu.edu.au/polsci/marx/contemp/pamsetc/twosouls/twosouls.htm |archive-date=20 January 2016 |access-date=20 January 2016 |quote=We have mentioned several cases of this conviction that socialism is the business of a new ruling minority, non-capitalist in nature and therefore guaranteed pure, imposing its own domination either temporarily (for a mere historical era) or even permanently. In either case, this new ruling class is likely to see its goal as an Education Dictatorship over the masses—to Do Them Good, of course—the dictatorship being exercised by an elite party which suppresses all control from below, or by benevolent despots or Savior-Leaders of some kind, or by Shaw's "Supermen," by eugenic manipulators, by Proudhon's "anarchist" managers or Saint-Simon's technocrats or their more modern equivalents—with up-to-date terms and new verbal screens which can be hailed as fresh social theory as against "nineteenth-century Marxism.}}</ref>

According to Arthur Lipow, Marx and Engels were "the founders of modern revolutionary democratic socialism", described as a form of "socialism from below" that is "based on a mass working-class movement, fighting from below for the extension of democracy and human freedom". This type of socialism is contrasted to that of the "authoritarian, anti-democratic creed" and "the various totalitarian collectivist ideologies which claim the title of socialism" as well as "the many varieties of 'socialism from above' which have led in the twentieth century to movements and state forms in which a despotic '[[Social:New class|new class]]' rules over a statified economy in the name of socialism", a division that "runs through the history of the socialist movement". Lipow identifies Bellamyism and [[Social:Stalinism|Stalinism]] as two prominent authoritarian socialist currents within the history of the socialist movement.<ref>{{cite book |last=Lipow |first=Arthur |date=1991 |title=Authoritarian Socialism in America: Edward Bellamy and the Nationalist Movement |publisher=University of California Press |pages=1 |isbn=978-0520075436}}</ref>

=== Libertarian socialism ===
{{main|Philosophy:Libertarian socialism}}
[[File:Le libertaire 25.png|thumb|left|upright|The first anarchist journal to use the term ''libertarian'' was ''Le Libertaire, Journal du Mouvement Social'', published in New York City between 1858 and 1861 by French libertarian communist Joseph Déjacque,<ref name="theanarchistlibrary">{{cite web |url=http://www.theanarchistlibrary.org/HTML/The_Anarchist_FAQ_Editorial_Collective__150_years_of_Libertarian.html |title=150 years of Libertarian |website=theanarchistlibrary.org}}</ref> the first recorded person to describe himself as ''libertarian.''<ref name="Dejacque">Joseph Déjacque, [http://joseph.dejacque.free.fr/ecrits/lettreapjp.htm De l'être-humain mâle et femelle – Lettre à P.J. Proudhon par Joseph Déjacque] (in French)</ref>]]
Libertarian socialism, sometimes called [[Philosophy:Left-libertarianism|left-libertarianism]],<ref>{{cite book |last1=Bookchin |first1=Murray |first2=Janet |last2=Biehl |title=The Murray Bookchin Reader |publisher=Cassell |date=1997 |page=170 |isbn=0304338737}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |last1=Hicks |first1=Steven V. |first2=Daniel E. |last2=Shannon |title=The American journal of economics and sociology |publisher=Blackwell Publishing |date=2003 |page=612}}</ref> [[Social:Social anarchism|social anarchism]]<ref name="Ostergaard 1991. p. 21">{{cite dictionary |last=Ostergaard |first=Geoffrey |title=Anarchism |dictionary=A Dictionary of Marxist Thought |publisher=Blackwell Publishing |date=1991 |page=21}}</ref><ref name="Noam Chomsky 2004, p. 739">Chomsky, Noam (2004). ''Language and Politics''. In Otero, Carlos Peregrín. AK Press. p. 739</ref> and socialist libertarianism,<ref>Miller, Wilbur R. (2012). ''The social history of crime and punishment in America. An encyclopedia.'' 5 vols. London: SAGE Publications. p. 1007. {{ISBN|1412988764}}. "There exist three major camps in libertarian thought: right-libertarianism, socialist libertarianism, and ..."</ref> is an anti-authoritarian, anti-statist and libertarian<ref>"It implies a classless and anti-authoritarian (i.e. libertarian) society in which people manage their own affairs" [http://www.infoshop.org/AnarchistFAQSectionI1#sthash.40vnyElp.dpuf I.1 Isn't libertarian socialism an oxymoron?] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20171116212712/http://www.infoshop.org/AnarchistFAQSectionI1#sthash.40vnyElp.dpuf|date=16 November 2017}} at An Anarchist FAQ</ref> tradition within socialism that rejects centralised state ownership and control<ref>"unlike other socialists, they tend to see (to various different degrees, depending on the thinker) to be skeptical of centralised state intervention as the solution to capitalist exploitation..." Roderick T. Long. "Toward a libertarian theory of class." ''Social Philosophy and Policy''. Volume 15. Issue 02. Summer 1998. Pg. 305</ref> including criticism of [[Social:Wage labour|wage labour]] relationships ([[Social:Wage slavery|wage slavery]])<ref>"Therefore, rather than being an oxymoron, "libertarian socialism" indicates that true socialism must be libertarian and that a libertarian who is not a socialist is a phoney. As true socialists oppose wage labour, they must also oppose the state for the same reasons. Similarly, libertarians must oppose wage labour for the same reasons they must oppose the state." [http://www.infoshop.org/AnarchistFAQSectionI1 "I1. Isn't libertarian socialism an oxymoron"]. {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20171116212712/http://www.infoshop.org/AnarchistFAQSectionI1|date=16 November 2017}}. In ''An Anarchist FAQ''.</ref> as well as the state itself.<ref name=":0">"So, libertarian socialism rejects the idea of state ownership and control of the economy, along with the state as such. Through workers' self-management it proposes to bring an end to authority, exploitation, and hierarchy in production." [http://www.infoshop.org/AnarchistFAQSectionI1 "I1. Isn't libertarian socialism an oxymoron" in] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20171116212712/http://www.infoshop.org/AnarchistFAQSectionI1|date=16 November 2017}} An Anarchist FAQ</ref> It emphasises [[Philosophy:Workers' self-management|workers' self-management]] and decentralised structures of political organisation.<ref name=":0"/><ref>" ...preferring a system of popular self governance via networks of decentralized, local voluntary, participatory, cooperative associations. Roderick T. Long. "Toward a libertarian theory of class." ''Social Philosophy and Policy''. Volume 15. Issue 02. Summer 1998. Pg. 305</ref> Libertarian socialism asserts that a society based on freedom and equality can be achieved through abolishing authoritarian institutions that control production.<ref>Mendes, Silva. ''Socialismo Libertário ou Anarchismo'' Vol. 1 (1896): "Society should be free through mankind's spontaneous federative affiliation to life, based on the community of land and tools of the trade; meaning: Anarchy will be equality by abolition of [[Finance:Private property|private property]] (while retaining respect for personal property) and [[Philosophy:Liberty|liberty]] by abolition of [[Philosophy:Authority|authority]]".</ref> Libertarian socialists generally prefer [[Philosophy:Direct democracy|direct democracy]] and [[Social:Federalism#Federalism as the anarchist and libertarian socialist mode of political organization|federal]] or [[Social:Confederation|confederal]] associations such as libertarian municipalism, citizens' assemblies, trade unions and [[Social:Workers' council|workers' council]]s.<ref>"...preferring a system of popular self governance via networks of decentralized, local, voluntary, participatory, cooperative associations-sometimes as a complement to and check on state power..."</ref><ref>{{cite book |last=Rocker |first=Rudolf |title=Anarcho-Syndicalism: Theory and Practice |page=65 |year=2004 |publisher=AK Press |isbn=978-1902593920}}</ref>

Anarcho-syndicalist Gaston Leval explained:

{{Blockquote|We therefore foresee a Society in which all activities will be coordinated, a structure that has, at the same time, sufficient flexibility to permit the greatest possible autonomy for social life, or for the life of each enterprise, and enough cohesiveness to prevent all disorder. ... In a well-organised society, all of these things must be systematically accomplished by means of parallel federations, vertically united at the highest levels, constituting one vast organism in which all economic functions will be performed in solidarity with all others and that will permanently preserve the necessary cohesion".<ref>Leval, Gaston (1959). [https://libcom.org/library/libertarian-socialism-practical-outline-gaston-leval "Libertarian Socialism: A Practical Outline"]. Libcom.org. Retrieved 22 August 2020.</ref>}}

All of this is typically done within a general call for [[Philosophy:Liberty|libertarian]]<ref>{{cite journal |quote=LibSoc share with LibCap an aversion to any interference to freedom of thought, expression or choice of lifestyle. |first=Roderick T. |last=Long |title=Toward a libertarian theory of class |journal=Social Philosophy and Policy |volume=15 |issue=2 |date=Summer 1998 |page=305 |doi=10.1017/S0265052500002028 |s2cid=145150666}}</ref> and [[Social:Voluntaryism|voluntary]] free associations<ref>"What is implied by the term 'libertarian socialism'?: The idea that socialism is first and foremost about freedom and therefore about overcoming the domination, repression, and alienation that block the free flow of human creativity, thought, and action...An approach to socialism that incorporates cultural revolution, women's and children's liberation, and the critique and transformation of daily life, as well as the more traditional concerns of socialist politics. A politics that is completely revolutionary because it seeks to transform all of reality. We do not think that capturing the economy and the state lead automatically to the transformation of the rest of social being, nor do we equate liberation with changing our life-styles and our heads. Capitalism is a total system that invades all areas of life: socialism must be the overcoming of capitalist reality in its entirety, or it is nothing." "What is Libertarian Socialism?" by Ulli Diemer. Volume 2, Number 1 (Summer 1997 issue) of ''The Red Menace''.</ref> through the identification, criticism and practical dismantling of illegitimate authority in all aspects of human life.<ref name="auto">{{cite book |last=Goldman |first=Emma |title=Anarchism and Other Essays |chapter=What it Really Stands for Anarchy |quote=Anarchism, then, really stands for the liberation of the human mind from the dominion of religion; the liberation of the human body from the dominion of property; liberation from the shackles and restraint of government. Anarchism stands for a social order based on the free grouping of individuals for the purpose of producing real social wealth; an order that will guarantee to every human being free access to the earth and full enjoyment of the necessities of life, according to individual desires, tastes, and inclinations. |author-link=Emma Goldman}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |title=The Soviet Union Versus Socialism |url=http://chomsky.info/1986____/ |website=chomsky.info |access-date=22 November 2015 |quote=Libertarian socialism, furthermore, does not limit its aims to democratic control by producers over production, but seeks to abolish all forms of domination and hierarchy in every aspect of social and personal life, an unending struggle, since progress in achieving a more just society will lead to new insight and understanding of forms of oppression that may be concealed in traditional practice and consciousness.}}</ref>{{sfnp|McLaughlin|2007|p=1|ps= "Authority is defined in terms of the right to exercise social control (as explored in the "sociology of power") and the correlative duty to obey (as explored in the "philosophy of practical reason"). Anarchism is distinguished, philosophically, by its scepticism towards such moral relations—by its questioning of the claims made for such normative power—and, practically, by its challenge to those "authoritative" powers which cannot justify their claims and which are therefore deemed illegitimate or without moral foundation."}}

As part of the larger socialist movement, it seeks to distinguish itself from Bolshevism, Leninism and Marxism–Leninism as well as social democracy.<ref>{{cite book |quote=It is forgotten that the early defenders of commercial society like [Adam] Smith were as much concerned with criticising the associational blocks to mobile labour represented by guilds as they were to the activities of the state. The history of socialist thought includes a long associational and anti-statist tradition prior to the political victory of the Bolshevism in the east and varieties of Fabianism in the west. |first=John |last=O'Neil |title=The Market: Ethics, knowledge and politics |publisher=[[Company:Routledge|Routledge]] |date=1998 |page=3}}</ref> Past and present political philosophies and movements commonly described as libertarian socialist include [[Social:Anarchism|anarchism]] ([[Social:Anarcho-communism|anarcho-communism]], [[Social:Anarcho-syndicalism|anarcho-syndicalism]],{{cn|date=January 2023}} [[Social:Collectivist anarchism|collectivist anarchism]], [[Philosophy:Individualist anarchism|individualist anarchism]]<ref>"[[Biography:Benjamin Tucker|(Benjamin) Tucker]] referred to himself many times as a socialist and considered his philosophy to be "Anarchistic socialism." ''An Anarchist FAQ'' by Various Authors</ref><ref>French individualist anarchist Émile Armand shows clearly opposition to capitalism and centralised economies when he said that the individualist anarchist "inwardly he remains refractory—fatally refractory—morally, intellectually, economically (The capitalist economy and the directed economy, the speculators and the fabricators of single are equally repugnant to him.)"[http://www.spaz.org/~dan/individualist-anarchist/library/emile-armand/life-activity.html "Anarchist Individualism as a Life and Activity" by Emile Armand]</ref><ref>Anarchist Peter Sabatini reports that in the United States "of early to mid-19th century, there appeared an array of communal and "utopian" counterculture groups (including the so-called free love movement). William Godwin's anarchism exerted an ideological influence on some of this, but more so the socialism of Robert Owen and Charles Fourier. After success of his British venture, Owen himself established a cooperative community within the United States at New Harmony, Indiana during 1825. One member of this commune was Josiah Warren (1798–1874), considered to be the first individualist anarchist"[http://www.theanarchistlibrary.org/HTML/Peter_Sabatini__Libertarianism__Bogus_Anarchy.html Peter Sabatini. "Libertarianism: Bogus Anarchy"]</ref> and [[Social:Mutualism (economic theory)|mutualism]]),<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.mutualist.org/id32.html |title=A.4. Are Mutalists Socialists? |website=mutualist.org |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20090609075437/http://www.mutualist.org/id32.html |archive-date=9 June 2009}}</ref> [[Social:Autonomism|autonomism]], Communalism, participism, [[Social:Libertarian Marxism|libertarian Marxism]] ([[Organization:Council communism|council communism]] and Luxemburgism),<ref>{{cite book |first=Murray |last=Bookchin |title=Ghost of Anarcho-Syndicalism}}</ref><ref name="Graham-2005">{{cite book |author-link=Robert Graham (historian) |first=Robert |last=Graham |title=The General Idea of Proudhon's Revolution}}</ref> revolutionary syndicalism and [[Philosophy:Utopian socialism|utopian socialism]] ([[Philosophy:Fourierism|Fourierism]]).<ref>Kent Bromley, in his preface to Peter Kropotkin's book ''The Conquest of Bread'', considered early French utopian socialist Charles Fourier to be the founder of the libertarian branch of socialist thought, as opposed to the authoritarian socialist ideas of [François-Noël] Babeuf and [Philippe] Buonarroti." [[Biography:Peter Kropotkin|Kropotkin, Peter]]. ''The Conquest of Bread'', preface by Kent Bromley, New York and London, G.P. Putnam's Sons, 1906.</ref>

=== Religious socialism ===
{{main|Social:Religious socialism}}
[[Social:Christian socialism|Christian socialism]] is a broad concept involving an intertwining of Christian religion with socialism.<ref>{{cite book |last1=Leech |first1=Kenneth |year=2000 |chapter=Socialism |editor1-last=Hastings |editor1-first=Adrian |editor1-link=Adrian Hastings |editor2-last=Mason |editor2-first=Alistair |editor3-last=Pyper |editor3-first=Hugh |title=The Oxford Companion to Christian Thought |chapter-url=https://archive.org/details/oxfordcompaniont00hast |chapter-url-access=limited |location=Oxford |publisher=[[Organization:Oxford University Press|Oxford University Press]] |pages=[https://archive.org/details/oxfordcompaniont00hast/page/676 676–678] |isbn=978-0-19-860024-4 |access-date=8 August 2018 |url=https://archive.org/details/oxfordcompaniont00hast/page/676}}</ref>

[[File:23a-Lam-Alif.png|thumb|Arabic letters "Lam" and "Alif" reading "Lā" (Arabic for "No!") are a symbol of Islamic Socialism in [[Place:Turkey|Turkey]].]]
[[Religion:Islamic socialism|Islamic socialism]] is a more [[Philosophy:Spirituality|spiritual]] form of socialism. Muslim socialists believe that the teachings of the Quran and [[Biography:Muhammad|Muhammad]] are not only compatible with, but actively promoting the principles of [[Social:Social equality|equality]] and public ownership, drawing inspiration from the early Medina welfare state he established. Muslim socialists are more conservative than their Western contemporaries and find their roots in anti-imperialism, anti-colonialism<ref name="Reid 1974">{{cite journal |last=Reid |first=Donald M. |title=The Syrian Christians and Early Socialism in the Arab World |journal=International Journal of Middle East Studies |volume=5 |number=2 |date=1974 |pages=177–193 |doi=10.1017/S0020743800027811 |jstor=162588 |s2cid=161942887}}</ref><ref name=paracha>{{cite web |url=https://www.dawn.com/news/787645/islamic-socialism-a-history-from-left-to-right |title=Islamic Socialism: A history from left to right |last=Paracha |first=Nadeem F. |date=21 February 2013 |website=dawn.com |access-date=21 November 2020}}</ref> and sometimes, if in an Arab speaking country, Arab nationalism. Islamic socialists believe in deriving legitimacy from political [[Philosophy:Mandate (politics)|mandate]] as opposed to religious texts.

=== Social movements ===
{{main|Social:Eco-socialism|Social:Socialism and LGBT rights|Social:Socialist feminism}}
[[File:Zetkin luxemburg1910.jpg|thumb|left|upright|Socialist feminist Clara Zetkin and Rosa Luxemburg in 1910]]
Socialist feminism is a branch of [[Social:Feminism|feminism]] that argues that liberation can only be achieved by working to end both economic and [[Social:Culture|cultural]] sources of women's [[Philosophy:Oppression|oppression]].<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.feministezine.com/feminist/modern/Socialist-Feminism.html |title=What is Socialist Feminism? – The Feminist eZine |website=www.feministezine.com |access-date=20 April 2020}}</ref> Marxist feminism's foundation was laid by Engels in ''The Origin of the Family, Private Property, and the State'' (1884). [[Biography:August Bebel|August Bebel]]'s ''Woman under Socialism'' (1879), is the "single work dealing with sexuality most widely read by rank-and-file members of the Social Democratic Party of Germany (SPD)".<ref>{{cite journal |date=23 September 2003 |title=Acknowledgments |journal=Journal of Homosexuality |volume=45 |issue=2–4 |pages=xxvii–xxviii |doi=10.1300/j082v45n02_a |s2cid=216113584 |issn=0091-8369}}</ref> In the late 19th and early 20th centuries, both [[Biography:Clara Zetkin|Clara Zetkin]] and Eleanor Marx were against the demonisation of men and supported a proletariat revolution that would overcome as many male-female inequalities as possible.<ref name=Stokes>{{cite book |last=Stokes |first=John |title=Eleanor Marx (1855–1898): Life, Work, Contacts |year=2000 |publisher=[[Company:Ashgate Publishing|Ashgate Publishing]] |location=Aldershot |isbn=978-0754601135}}</ref> As their movement already had the most radical demands in women's equality, most Marxist leaders, including Clara Zetkin<ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.marxists.org/archive/draper/1976/women/3-zetkin.html |title=Clara Zetkin: On a Bourgeois Feminist Petition |website=Marxists Internet Archive |access-date=20 April 2020}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.marxists.org/archive/zetkin/1920/lenin/zetkin1.htm |title=Clara Zetkin: Lenin on the Women's Question |website=Marxists Internet Archive |access-date=20 April 2020}}</ref> and [[Biography:Alexandra Kollontai|Alexandra Kollontai]],<ref>{{cite web |url=https://www.marxists.org/archive/kollonta/1909/social-basis.htm |title=The Social Basis of the Woman Question by Alexandra Kollontai 1909 |website=Marxists Internet Archive |access-date=20 April 2020}}</ref><ref>{{Cite web |url=https://www.marxists.org/archive/kollonta/1919/women-workers/ch01.htm |title=Women Workers Struggle For Their Rights by Alexandra Kollontai 1919 |website=Marxists Internet Archive |access-date=20 April 2020}}</ref> counterposed Marxism against [[Social:Liberal feminism|liberal feminism]] rather than trying to combine them. Anarcha-feminism began with late 19th- and early 20th-century authors and theorists such as anarchist feminists Goldman and [[Biography:Voltairine de Cleyre|Voltairine de Cleyre]]<ref>{{cite book |title=Quiet rumours: an anarcha-feminist reader |date=2012 |publisher=AK Press/Dark Star |isbn=978-1849351034 |oclc=835894204 |editor-last=Dunbar-Ortiz |editor-first=Roxanne |page=9}}</ref> In the Spanish Civil War, an anarcha-feminist group, {{lang|es|Mujeres Libres}} ("Free Women") linked to the {{lang|es|[[Social:Federación Anarquista Ibérica|Federación Anarquista Ibérica]]}}, organised to defend both anarchist and feminist ideas.<ref>{{cite book |last=Ackelsberg |first=Martha A. |title=Free Women of Spain: Anarchism and the Struggle for the Emancipation of Women |date=2005 |publisher=AK Press |isbn=1902593960 |oclc=884001264}}</ref> In 1972, the Chicago Women's Liberation Union published "Socialist Feminism: A Strategy for the Women's Movement", which is believed to be the first published use of the term "socialist feminism".<ref name="CWLUOver">{{cite web |last1=Davenport |first1=Sue |last2=Strobel |first2=Margaret |year=1999 |title=The Chicago Women's Liberation Union: An Introduction |website=The CWLU Herstory Website |publisher=University of Illinois |url=http://www.uic.edu/orgs/cwluherstory/CWLUAbout/abdoc1.html |access-date=25 November 2011 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20111104090301/http://www.uic.edu/orgs/cwluherstory/CWLUAbout/abdoc1.html |archive-date=4 November 2011}}</ref>

[[File:Day, Fred Holland (1864–1933) - Edward Carpenter.jpg|thumb|upright|Edward Carpenter, philosopher and activist who was instrumental in the foundation of the Fabian Society and the Labour Party as well as in the early LGBTI western movements]]
Many socialists were early advocates of LGBT rights. For early socialist [[Biography:Charles Fourier|Charles Fourier]], true freedom could only occur without suppressing passions, as the suppression of passions is not only destructive to the individual, but to society as a whole. Writing before the advent of the term "homosexuality", Fourier recognised that both men and women have a wide range of sexual needs and preferences which may change throughout their lives, including same-sex sexuality and ''androgénité''. He argued that all sexual expressions should be enjoyed as long as people are not abused and that "affirming one's difference" can actually enhance social integration.<ref>{{cite journal |last=Desbazeille |first=Michèle Madonna |date=1990 |title=Le Nouveau Monde amoureux de Charles Fourier: une écriture passionnée de la rencontre |language=fr |trans-title=The New World in Love with Charles Fourier: A Passionate Writing of the Encounter |journal=Romantisme |volume=20 |issue=68 |pages=97–110 |doi=10.3406/roman.1990.6129 |issn=0048-8593}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |first=Charles |last=Fourier |title=Le Nouveau Monde amoureux |language=fr |trans-title=The New World of Love |orig-date=1816–1818 |date=1967 |location=Paris |publisher=Éditions Anthropos |pages=389, 391, 429, 458, 459, 462, and 463}}</ref> In [[Biography:Oscar Wilde|Oscar Wilde]]'s ''[[Social:The Soul of Man Under Socialism|The Soul of Man Under Socialism]]'', he advocates an egalitarian society where wealth is shared by all, while warning of the dangers of social systems that crush individuality.<ref>{{cite book |last=McKenna |first=Neil |url={{google books|plainurl=y|id=giD2qu4C-sUC}} |title=The Secret Life of Oscar Wilde |year=2009 |publisher=Basic Books |isbn=978-0786734924}} According to McKenna, Wilde was part of a secret organisation that aimed to legalise homosexuality, and was known among the group as a leader of "the Cause".</ref> Edward Carpenter actively campaigned for homosexual rights. His work ''The Intermediate Sex: A Study of Some Transitional Types of Men and Women'' was a 1908 book arguing for gay liberation.<ref>{{cite book |last=Flood |first=Michael |author-link=Michael Flood |title=International encyclopedia of men and masculinities |date=2013 |publisher=[[Company:Routledge|Routledge]]|isbn=978-0415864541 |oclc=897581763 |page=315}}</ref> who was an influential personality in the foundation of the Fabian Society and the Labour Party. After the Russian Revolution under the leadership of Lenin and Trotsky, the Soviet Union abolished previous laws against homosexuality.<ref>{{cite book |first=Paul |last=Russell |title=The Gay 100: A Ranking of the Most Influential Gay Men and Lesbians, Past and Present |url={{google books|plainurl=y|id=jACXalmJ3nEC|page=124}} |year=2002 |publisher=Kensington Publishing Corporation |isbn=978-0758201003 |page=124}}</ref> Harry Hay was an early leader in the American LGBT rights movement as well as a member of the Communist Party USA. He is known for his involvement in the founding of gay organisations, including the Mattachine Society, the first sustained gay rights group in the United States which in its early days reflected a strong Marxist influence. The ''Encyclopedia of Homosexuality'' reports that "[a]s Marxists the founders of the group believed that the injustice and oppression which they suffered stemmed from relationships deeply embedded in the structure of American society".<ref>{{cite web |url=http://williamapercy.com/wiki/images/Mattachine.pdf |title=Mattachine Society at Dynes, Wayne R. (ed.) |website=Encyclopedia of Homosexuality |access-date=10 March 2014 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120419214800/http://www.williamapercy.com/wiki/images/Mattachine.pdf |archive-date=19 April 2012}}</ref> Emerging from events such as the May 1968 insurrection in France, the anti-Vietnam war movement in the US and the Stonewall riots of 1969, militant gay liberation organisations began to spring up around the world. Many sprang from left radicalism more than established homophile groups,<ref>[http://www.washblade.com/2004/11-5/news/national/movement.cfm Gay movement boosted by '79 march on Washington] {{Webarchive|url=https://web.archive.org/web/20091116051252/http://www.washblade.com/2004/11-5/news/national/movement.cfm |date=16 November 2009}}, Lou Chabarro 2004 for the Washington Blade.</ref> although the Gay Liberation Front took an [[Social:Anti-capitalism|anti-capitalist]] stance and attacked the [[Social:Nuclear family|nuclear family]] and traditional [[Social:Gender role|gender role]]s.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/pwh/glf-london.html |title=Gay Liberation Front: Manifesto. London |orig-date=1971 |year=1978 |access-date=27 March 2014 |archive-date=30 April 2012 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20120430002550/http://www.fordham.edu/halsall/pwh/glf-london.html |url-status=dead }}</ref>

Eco-socialism is a political strain merging aspects of socialism, Marxism or libertarian socialism with green politics, ecology and alter-globalisation. Eco-socialists generally claim that the expansion of the capitalist system is the cause of social exclusion, poverty, war and environmental degradation through globalisation and [[Social:Imperialism|imperialism]] under the supervision of repressive [[Earth:State (polity)|states]] and transnational structures.<ref name="Manifesto">{{cite book |last1=Kovel |first1=J. |last2=Löwy |first2=M. |title=An ecosocialist manifesto |url=http://environment-ecology.com/political-ecology/436-an-ecosocialist-manifesto.html |year=2001}}</ref> Contrary to the depiction of [[Biography:Karl Marx|Karl Marx]] by some environmentalists,<ref name=Eckersley>{{cite book |last=Eckersley |first=Robyn |url={{google books|plainurl=y|id=KLr7Y-mQiRQC}} |title=Environmentalism and Political Theory: Toward an Ecocentric Approach |year=1992 |publisher=SUNY Press |isbn=978-0791410134}}</ref> social ecologists<ref>{{cite book |last=Clark |first=John P. |url={{google books|plainurl=y|id=hcIgAQAAIAAJ}} |title=The Anarchist Moment: Reflections on Culture, Nature, and Power |date=1984 |publisher=Black Rose Books |isbn=978-0920057087}}</ref> and fellow socialists<ref name=Benton>{{Cite book |last=Benton |first=Ted |title=The greening of Marxism |year=1996 |publisher=The Guilford Press |isbn=1572301198 |oclc=468837567}}</ref> as a [[Social:Productivism|productivist]] who favoured the domination of nature, eco-socialists revisited Marx's writings and believe that he "was a main originator of the ecological world-view".<ref name=Kovel>{{cite book |last=Kovel |first=Joel |author-link=Joel Kovel |title=The Enemy of Nature: the End of Capitalism or the End of the World? |date=2013 |publisher=Zed Books |isbn=978-1848136595 |oclc=960164995}}</ref> Marx discussed a "metabolic rift" between man and nature, stating that "private ownership of the globe by single individuals will appear quite absurd as private ownership of one man by another" and his observation that a society must "hand it [the planet] down to succeeding generations in an improved condition".<ref name=Capital3>{{cite book |last=Marx |first=Karl |author-link=Karl Marx |title=Capital: a critique of political economy |volume=3 |date=1981 |publisher=Penguin in association with New Left Review |isbn=0140221166 |oclc=24235898}}</ref> English socialist William Morris is credited with developing principles of what was later called eco-socialism.<ref name=Babylon>{{cite book |last=Wall |first=Derek |author-link=Derek Wall |title=The no-nonsense guide to green politics |date=2010 |publisher=New Internationalist |isbn=978-1906523589 |oclc=776590485}}</ref> During the 1880s and 1890s, Morris promoted his ideas within the Social Democratic Federation and Socialist League.<ref name=GLSite>{{cite web |url=http://www.greenleft.org.uk |title=Green Left|website=greenleft.org.uk |access-date=3 April 2016 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160405022509/http://www.greenleft.org.uk/ |archive-date=5 April 2016}}</ref> Green anarchism blends anarchism with environmental issues. An important early influence was [[Biography:Henry David Thoreau|Henry David Thoreau]] and his book ''[[Philosophy:Walden|Walden]]''<ref>{{Cite web |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20060526224800/http://www.acracia.org/xdiez.html |date=26 May 2006 |access-date=20 April 2020 |quote=Su obra más representativa es Walden, aparecida en 1854, aunque redactada entre 1845 y 1847, cuando Thoreau decide instalarse en el aislamiento de una cabaña en el bosque, y vivir en íntimo contacto con la naturaleza, en una vida de soledad y sobriedad. De esta experiencia, su filosofía trata de transmitirnos la idea que resulta necesario un retorno respetuoso a la naturaleza, y que la felicidad es sobre todo fruto de la riqueza interior y de la armonía de los individuos con el entorno natural. Muchos han visto en Thoreau a uno de los precursores del ecologismo y del anarquismo primitivista representado en la actualidad por [[Biography:John Zerzan|John Zerzan]]. Para George Woodcock, esta actitud puede estar también motivada por una cierta idea de resistencia al progreso y de rechazo al materialismo creciente que caracteriza la sociedad norteamericana de mediados de siglo XIX. |trans-quote=His most representative work is Walden, published in 1854, although written between 1845 and 1847, when Thoreau decides to settle in the isolation of a cabin in the woods, and live in intimate contact with nature, in a life of solitude and sobriety. From this experience, his philosophy tries to convey to us the idea that a respectful return to nature is necessary, and that happiness is above all the fruit of inner richness and the harmony of individuals with the natural environment. Many have seen in Thoreau one of the forerunners of environmentalism and primitive anarchism represented today by [[Biography:John Zerzan|John Zerzan]]. For George Woodcock, this attitude may also be motivated by a certain idea of resistance to progress and rejection of the growing materialism that characterizes American society in the mid-nineteenth century. |url=http://www.acracia.org/xdiez.html |title=La Insumisión voluntaria. El Anarquismo individualista Español durante la Dictadura i la Segunda República (1923–1938) |language=es |trans-title=Voluntary submission. Spanish Individualist Anarchism during the Dictatorship and the Second Republic (1923–1938) |first=Xavier |last=Diez |archive-date=26 May 2006}}</ref> as well as Élisée Reclus.<ref name="Reclus1">{{cite web |url=http://www.natustar.com/uk/naturism-begin.html |title=Naturists: The first naturists & the naturist culture – Natustar |access-date=11 October 2013 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20121025125935/http://www.natustar.com/uk/naturism-begin.html |archive-date=25 October 2012}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |url=http://anarchism.pageabode.com/afaq/secA3.html#seca33 |title=A.3 What types of anarchism are there? |website=Anarchist Writers |access-date=10 March 2014 |archive-date=15 June 2018 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180615004526/http://anarchism.pageabode.com/afaq/secA3.html#seca33}}</ref>

In the late 19th century, anarcho-naturism fused anarchism and naturist philosophies within individualist anarchist circles in France, Spain, Cuba<ref name="raforum.info">{{cite web |url=http://raforum.info/spip.php?article3061&lang=fr |title=R.A. Forum > SHAFFER, Kirwin R. Anarchism and countercultural politics in early twentieth-century Cuba |website=raforum.info |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20131012003926/http://raforum.info/spip.php?article3061&lang=fr |archive-date=12 October 2013}}</ref> and Portugal.<ref name="spanishind">{{cite web |url=http://www.acracia.org/xdiez.html |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20060526224800/http://www.acracia.org/xdiez.html |title=La Insumisión voluntaria. El Anarquismo individualista Español durante la Dictadura i la Segunda República (1923–1938) by Xavier Diez |language=es |trans-title=Voluntary submission. Spanish Individualist Anarchism during the Dictatorship and the Second Republic (1923–1938) by Xavier Diez |archive-date=26 May 2006}}</ref> [[Biography:Murray Bookchin|Murray Bookchin]]'s first book ''Our Synthetic Environment''<ref>{{cite web |url=http://dwardmac.pitzer.edu/Anarchist_Archives/bookchin/bio1.html |title=A Short Biography of Murray Bookchin by Janet Biehl |first=Janet |last=Biehl |publisher=Dwardmac.pitzer.edu |access-date=11 May 2012}}</ref> was followed by his essay "Ecology and Revolutionary Thought" which introduced ecology as a concept in radical politics.<ref>{{cite web |url=http://dwardmac.pitzer.edu/Anarchist_Archives/bookchin/ecologyandrev.html |title=Ecology and Revolution |first=Murray |last=Bookchin |author-link=Murray Bookchin |publisher=Dwardmac.pitzer.edu |date=16 June 2004 |access-date=11 May 2012}}</ref> In the 1970s, Barry Commoner, claimed that capitalist technologies were chiefly responsible for environmental degradation as opposed to [[Unsolved:Human overpopulation|population pressures]].<ref name=Commoner>{{Cite book |last=Commoner |first=Barry |author-link=Barry Commoner |title=The closing circle: nature, man, and technology |year=2020 |publisher=Courier Dover Publications |isbn=978-0486846248 |oclc=1141422712}}</ref> In the 1990s socialist/feminists Mary Mellor<ref name=Mellor>{{Cite book |last=Mellor |first=Mary |title=Breaking the boundaries: towards a feminist green socialism |date=1992 |publisher=Virago Press |isbn=1853812005 |oclc=728578769}}</ref> and [[Biography:Ariel Salleh|Ariel Salleh]]<ref name=Salleh>{{Cite book |last=Salleh |first=Ariel |author-link=Ariel Salleh |title=Ecofeminism as politics: nature, Marx and the postmodern |year=2017 |publisher=Zed Books |isbn=978-1786990976 |oclc=951936453}}</ref> adopt an eco-socialist paradigm. An "environmentalism of the poor" combining ecological awareness and [[Social:Social justice|social justice]] has also become prominent.<ref name=Guha>{{Cite book |last=Guha |first=Ramachandra |author-link=Ramachandra Guha |title=Varieties of Environmentalism Essays North and South |date=2013 |publisher=Taylor & Francis |isbn=978-1134173341 |oclc=964049036}}</ref> Pepper critiqued the current approach of many within [[Social:Green politics|green politics]], particularly [[Biology:Deep ecology|deep ecologists]].<ref>{{Cite book |last=Pepper |first=David |year=2002 |title=Eco-Socialism |doi=10.4324/9780203423363 |isbn=978-0203423363}}</ref>

=== Syndicalism ===
{{main|Social:Syndicalism}}
Syndicalism operates through industrial trade unions. It rejects [[Philosophy:State socialism|state socialism]] and the use of establishment politics. Syndicalists reject state power in favour of strategies such as the general strike. Syndicalists advocate a socialist economy based on federated unions or syndicates of workers who own and manage the means of production. Some Marxist currents advocate syndicalism, such as [[Social:De Leonism|De Leonism]]. Anarcho-syndicalism views syndicalism as a method for workers in capitalist society to gain control of an economy. The Spanish Revolution was largely orchestrated by the anarcho-syndicalist trade union [[Social:Confederación Nacional del Trabajo|CNT]].<ref>{{cite book |first=Sam |last=Dolgoff |title=The Anarchist Collectives Workers' Self-management in the Spanish Revolution 1936–1939 |publisher=Free Life Editions |edition=1st |date=1974}}</ref> The International Workers' Association is an international federation of anarcho-syndicalist labour unions and initiatives.<ref>{{cite journal |last1=Hargis |first1=Mike |title=No Human Being is Illegal: International Workers' Association Conference on Immigration |journal=Anarcho-Syndicalist Review |date=2002 |issue=33 |page=10}}</ref>

== Public views ==

A multitude of polls have found significant levels of support for socialism among modern populations.<ref>{{cite web |title=The value of socialism: Global IPSOS poll (2018) |url=https://www.ipsos.com/en-za/value-socialism-global-ipsos-poll}}</ref><ref>{{cite web |last1=Stancil |first1=Kenny |title=Socialism Is Gaining Popularity, Poll Shows |url=https://truthout.org/articles/socialism-is-gaining-popularity-poll-shows/ |website=Truthout |date=26 June 2021}}</ref>

A 2018 IPSOS poll found that 50% of the respondents globally strongly or somewhat agreed that present socialist values were of great value for societal progress. In China this was 84%, India 72%, Malaysia 62%, Turkey 62%, South Africa 57%, Brazil 57%, Russia 55%, Spain 54%, Argentina 52%, Mexico 51%, Saudi Arabia 51%, Sweden 49%, Canada 49%, Great Britain 49%, Australia 49%, Poland 48%, Chile 48%, South Korea 48%, Peru 48%, Italy 47%, Serbia 47%, Germany 45%, Belgium 44%, Romania 40%, United States 39%, France 31%, Hungary 28% and Japan 21%.<ref>{{cite web |title=IPSOS - Global Socialism Survey 2018 |url=https://www.ipsos.com/sites/default/files/ct/news/documents/2018-05/global_socialism_survey-ipsos.pdf}}</ref>

A 2021 survey conducted by the [[Organization:Institute of Economic Affairs|Institute of Economic Affairs]] (IEA) found that 67% of young British (16-24) respondents wanted to live in a [[Social:Planned economy|socialist economic system]] and 75% agreed with the view that [[Earth:Climate change|climate change]] was a specifically capitalist problem.<ref>{{cite book |title=67 per cent of young Brits want a socialist economic system, finds new poll |url=https://iea.org.uk/media/67-per-cent-of-young-brits-want-a-socialist-economic-system-finds-new-poll/}}</ref>

A 2021 Axios poll found that 51% of 18-34 US adults had a positive view of socialism and 41% of Americans more generally had a positive view compared to 52% of those who viewing socialism more negatively.<ref>{{cite web |title=Axios{{!}}SurveyMonkey Poll: Capitalism and Socialism (2021) |url=https://uk.surveymonkey.com/curiosity/axios-capitalism-update/ |website=SurveyMonkey}}</ref>

In 2023, the Fraser Institute published findings which found that 42% of Canadians viewed socialism as the ideal system compared to 43% of British respondents, 40% Australian respondents and 31% American respondents. Overall support for socialism ranged from 50% of Canadians 18-24 year olds to 28% of Canadians over 55.<ref>{{cite web |title=Four in 10 Canadians prefer socialism but not higher taxes to pay for it: op-ed |url=https://www.fraserinstitute.org/article/four-in-10-canadians-prefer-socialism-but-not-higher-taxes-to-pay-for-it |website=Fraser Institute |language=en |date=23 February 2023}}</ref>

== Criticism ==
{{main|Social:Criticism of socialism}}
{{multiple image
| perrow            = 3
| total_width       = 350
| image1            = Portrait of Milton Friedman.jpg
| image2            = Ludwig von Mises.jpg
| image3            = Friedrich Hayek portrait.jpg
| image4            = 
| footer            = L–R: [[Biography:Milton Friedman|Milton Friedman]], Ludwig von Mises and [[Biography:Friedrich Hayek|Friedrich Hayek]], economists belonging to the Chicago and [[Social:Austrian school of economics|Austrian]] schools of economics and critics of socialism in the 20th century
}}

According to analytical Marxist sociologist [[Biography:Erik Olin Wright|Erik Olin Wright]], "The Right condemned socialism as violating individual rights to private property and unleashing monstrous forms of state oppression", while "the Left saw it as opening up new vistas of social equality, genuine freedom and the development of human potentials."<ref>{{Cite web |last=Wright |first=Erik Olin |date=15 January 2012 |title=Toward a Social Socialism |url=https://thepointmag.com/politics/toward-a-social-socialism/ |access-date=27 September 2022 |website=The Point Magazine |language=en-US |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20201022120117/https://thepointmag.com/politics/toward-a-social-socialism/ |archive-date=22 October 2020}}</ref>

Because of socialism's many varieties, most critiques have focused on a specific approach. Proponents of one approach typically criticise others. Socialism has been criticised in terms of its [[Social:Socialist economics|models of economic organization]] as well as its political and social implications. Other critiques are directed at the socialist movement, parties, or existing [[Earth:Socialist state|states]].

Some forms of criticism occupy theoretical grounds, such as in the [[Social:Economic calculation problem|economic calculation problem]] presented by proponents of the [[Social:Austrian School|Austrian School]] as part of the [[Social:Socialist calculation debate|socialist calculation debate]], while others support their criticism by examining historical attempts to establish socialist societies. The economic calculation problem concerns the feasibility and methods of resource allocation for a [[Social:Planned economy|planned socialist system]].<ref>{{cite book |editor1-last=Durlauf |editor1-first=Steven N. |editor1-link=Steven Durlauf |editor2-last=Blume |editor2-first=Lawrence E. |editor2-link=Lawrence E. Blume |date=1987 |title=The New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics Online |chapter=Socialist Calculation Debate |pages=685–692 |url=https://link.springer.com/referenceworkentry/10.1057/978-1-349-95121-5_2070-1 |publisher=[[Company:Palgrave Macmillan|Palgrave Macmillan]] |access-date=2 February 2013 |doi=10.1057/9780230226203.1570 |isbn=9781349951215}}.</ref><ref>{{cite book |last1=Biddle |first1=Jeff |last2=Samuels |first2=Warren |last3=Davis |first3=John |date=2006 |title=A Companion to the History of Economic Thought |publisher=[[Company:Wiley-Blackwell|Wiley-Blackwell]] |page=319 |quote=What became known as the socialist calculation debate started when von Mises (1935 [1920]) launched a critique of socialism.}}</ref><ref>{{cite book |last1=Levy |first1=David M. |last2=Peart |first2=Sandra J. |date=2008 |chapter=Socialist calculation debate |title=The New Palgrave Dictionary of Economics |edition=Second |publisher=[[Company:Palgrave Macmillan|Palgrave Macmillan]]}}</ref> Central planning is also criticized by elements of the radical left. Libertarian socialist economist Robin Hahnel notes that even if central planning overcame its inherent inhibitions of incentives and innovation, it would nevertheless be unable to maximize economic democracy and self-management, which he believes are concepts that are more intellectually coherent, consistent and just than mainstream notions of economic freedom.<ref name="Hahnel, Robin 2002">{{cite book |last=Hahnel |first=Robin |title=The ABC's of Political Economy |publisher=[[Company:Pluto Press|Pluto Press]] |date=2002 |page=262}}</ref>

[[Social:Economic liberalism|Economic liberals]] and [[Finance:Right-libertarianism|right-libertarians]] argue that private ownership of the [[Social:Means of production|means of production]] and market exchange are natural entities or moral rights which are central to freedom and liberty and argue that the economic dynamics of [[Philosophy:Capitalism|capitalism]] are immutable and absolute. As such, they also argue that public ownership of the means of production and [[Social:Economic planning|economic planning]] are infringements upon liberty.<ref name="milton2">{{cite web |title=On Milton Friedman, MGR & Annaism |url=http://www.sangam.org/taraki/articles/2006/11-25_Friedman_MGR.php?uid=2075 |access-date=30 October 2011 |publisher=Sangam.org}}</ref><ref name="Bellamy, Richard 2003 60">{{cite book |last=Bellamy |first=Richard |title=The Cambridge History of Twentieth-Century Political Thought |publisher={{wipe|Cambridge University Press}} |year=2003 |isbn=978-0521563543 |page=60}}</ref>

Critics of socialism have argued that in any society where everyone holds equal wealth, there can be no material incentive to work because one does not receive rewards for a work well done. They further argue that incentives increase productivity for all people and that the loss of those effects would lead to stagnation. Some critics of socialism argue that income sharing reduces individual incentives to work and therefore incomes should be individualized as much as possible.<ref>{{cite book |first1=Zoltan J. |last1=Acs |first2=Bernard |last2=Young |title=Small and Medium-Sized Enterprises in the Global Economy |publisher=[[Organization:University of Michigan Press|University of Michigan Press]] |page=47 |date=1999}}</ref>

Some philosophers have also criticized the aims of socialism, arguing that equality erodes away at individual diversities and that the establishment of an equal society would have to entail strong coercion.<ref name="Self">{{cite book |first=Self |last=Peter |chapter=Socialism |title=A Companion to Contemporary Political Philosophy |editor1-last=Goodin |editor1-first=Robert E. |editor1-link=Robert E. Goodin |editor2-last=Pettit |editor2-first=Philip |editor2-link=Philip Pettit |publisher=Blackwell Publishing |date=1995 |page=339 |quote=Extreme equality overlooks the diversity of individual talents, tastes and needs, and save in a utopian society of unselfish individuals would entail strong coercion; but even short of this goal, there is the problem of giving reasonable recognition to different individual needs, tastes (for work or leisure) and talents. It is true therefore that beyond some point the pursuit of equality runs into controversial or contradictory criteria of need or merit.}}</ref>

[[Biography:Milton Friedman|Milton Friedman]] argued that the absence of private economic activity would enable political leaders to grant themselves coercive powers, powers that, under a capitalist system, would instead be granted by a capitalist class, which Friedman found preferable.<ref name="Bellamy, Richard 2003 602">{{cite book |author=Bellamy, Richard |title=The Cambridge History of Twentieth-Century Political Thought |publisher=Cambridge University Press |year=2003 |isbn=978-0521563543 |page=60}}</ref>

Many commentators on the political right point to the mass killings under communist regimes, claiming them as an indictment of socialism.<ref>{{Cite web |last=Piereson |first=James |title=Socialism as a hate crime |url=https://newcriterion.com/blogs/dispatch/socialism-as-a-hate-crime-9746 |access-date=22 October 2021 |website=newcriterion.com |language=en |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180826070443/https://newcriterion.com/blogs/dispatch/socialism-as-a-hate-crime-9746 |archive-date=26 August 2018}}</ref>{{sfnp|Engel-DiMauro|2021|pp=1–17}}<ref>{{Cite news |last=Satter |first=David |date=6 November 2017 |title=100 Years of Communism—and 100 Million Dead |language=en-US |work={{wipe|The Wall Street Journal}} |url=https://www.wsj.com/articles/100-years-of-communismand-100-million-dead-1510011810 |access-date=22 October 2021 |issn=0099-9660 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20180112092528/https://www.wsj.com/articles/100-years-of-communismand-100-million-dead-1510011810 |archive-date=12 January 2018}}</ref> Opponents of this view, including supporters of socialism, state that these killings were aberrations caused by specific authoritarian regimes, and not caused by socialism itself, and  draw comparisons to killings and excess deaths under [[Social:Colonialism|colonialism]] and [[Social:Anti-communist mass killings|anti-communist authoritarian governments]].<ref>{{harvp|Bevins|2020|pp=238–240}}; {{harvp|Ghodsee|Sehon|2018}}; {{harvp|Engel-DiMauro|2021|pp=1–17}}; {{harvp|Sullivan|Hickel|2022}}</ref>

== See also ==
{{div col}}
* Anarchism and socialism
* [[Philosophy:Critique of work|Critique of work]]
* List of socialist parties with national parliamentary representation
* [[Social:List of communist ideologies|List of communist ideologies]]
* List of socialist songs
* [[Earth:List of socialist states|List of socialist states]]
* Paris Commune
* [[Social:Socialist democracy|Socialist democracy]]
* [[Social:Scientific socialism|Scientific socialism]]
* [[Philosophy:Critique of political economy#Marx|Marxian critique of political economy]]
* Why Socialism? – an article written by [[Biography:Albert Einstein|Albert Einstein]]
* [[Philosophy:Zenitism|Zenitism]]
{{div col end}}

== References ==
{{reflist}}

=== Bibliography ===
{{refbegin|30em}}
<!-- A -->
* {{cite book |last=Aarons |first=Mark |date=2007 |chapter-url=https://books.google.com/books?id=dg0hWswKgTIC&pg=PA69 |chapter=Justice Betrayed: Post-1945 Responses to Genocide |editor1-first=David A. |editor1-last=Blumenthal |editor1-link=David Blumenthal |editor2-first=Timothy L. H. |editor2-last=McCormack |url=http://www.brill.com/legacy-nuremberg-civilising-influence-or-institutionalised-vengeance |title=The Legacy of Nuremberg: Civilising Influence or Institutionalised Vengeance? (International Humanitarian Law) |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20160105053952/http://www.brill.com/legacy-nuremberg-civilising-influence-or-institutionalised-vengeance |archive-date=5 January 2016 |publisher=Martinus Nijhoff Publishers |isbn=978-9004156913}}
* {{cite journal |last=Arneson |first=Richard J. |title=Is Socialism Dead? A Comment on Market Socialism and Basic Income Capitalism |date=April 1992 |journal=Ethics |volume=102 |number=3 |pages=485–511 |doi=10.1086/293421 |s2cid=154502214}}
* {{cite book |last=Arnold |first=N. Scott |title=The Philosophy and Economics of Market Socialism: A Critical Study |url=https://archive.org/details/philosophyeconom00arno |url-access=limited |publisher=[[Organization:Oxford University Press|Oxford University Press]] |date=1994 |isbn=978-0195088274}}
<!-- B -->
* {{cite book |editor1-last=Badie |editor1-first=Bertrand |editor1-link=Bertrand Badie |editor2-last=Berg-Schlosser |editor2-first=Dirk |editor2-link=Dirk Berg-Schlosser |editor3-last=Morlino |editor3-first=Leonardo |editor3-link=Leonardo Morlino |title=International Encyclopedia of Political Science |publisher=SAGE Publications |year=2011 |doi=10.4135/9781412994163 |isbn=978-1-4129-5963-6}}
* {{cite book |last=Bailey |first=David J. |date=2009 |title=The Political Economy of European Social Democracy: A Critical Realist Approach |publisher=[[Company:Routledge|Routledge]] |isbn=978-04156-04253}}
* {{cite magazine |editor-last=Barrett |editor-first=William |date=1 April 1978 |url=https://www.commentarymagazine.com/articles/capitalism-socialism-and-democracy/ |title=Capitalism, Socialism, and Democracy: A Symposium |magazine=Commentary |access-date=14 June 2020 |archive-date=19 October 2019 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20191019061248/https://www.commentarymagazine.com/articles/capitalism-socialism-and-democracy/ |url-status=dead}}
* {{cite book |last=Beckett |first=Francis |title=Clem Attlee |publisher=Politico's |date=2007 |isbn=978-1842751923}}
* {{cite book |last=Berlau |first=A. Joseph |title=The German Social Democratic Party, 1914–1921 |place=New York |publisher=Columbia University Press |year=1949}}
* {{cite book |last=Berman |first=Sheri |date=1998 |title=The Social Democratic Moment |publisher=Harvard University Press |isbn=978-067444261-0}}
* {{cite book |editor1-last=Best |editor1-first=Steven |editor2-last=Kahn |editor2-first=Richard |editor3-last=Nocella II |editor3-first=Anthony J. |editor4-last=McLaren |editor4-first=Peter |editor1-link=Steven Best |editor4-link=Peter McLaren |date=2011 |title=The Global Industrial Complex: Systems of Domination |chapter=Introduction: Pathologies of Power and the Rise of the Global Industrial Complex |publisher=Rowman & Littlefield |isbn=978-0739136980}}
* {{cite book |last1=Bevins |first1=Vincent |title=The Jakarta Method: Washington's Anticommunist Crusade and the Mass Murder Program that Shaped Our World |date=2020 |publisher=PublicAffairs |pages=238–240 |isbn=978-1541742406}}
* {{cite book |last=Bockman |first=Johanna |title=Markets in the name of Socialism: The Left-Wing origins of Neoliberalism |publisher=Stanford University Press |year=2011 |isbn=978-0804775663}}
* {{cite book |last1=Brandal |first1=Nik |last2=Bratberg |first2=Øivind |last3=Thorsen |first3=Dag Einar |title=The Nordic Model of Social Democracy |date=2013 |publisher=Palgrave MacMillan |isbn=978-1137013262}}
* {{cite book |last=Brus |first=Wlodzimierz |title=The Economics and Politics of Socialism |publisher=[[Company:Routledge|Routledge]] |date=2015 |isbn=978-0415866477}}
* {{cite book |last=Busky |first=Donald F. |title=Democratic Socialism: A Global Survey |location=Westport, Connecticut |publisher=Praeger |year=2000 |isbn=978-0275968861}}
<!-- C -->
* {{cite news |last=Caulcutt |first=Clea |date=13 January 2022 |title=The end of the French left |url=https://www.politico.eu/article/christiane-taubira-last-resort-savior-france-left-tatters/ |access-date=20 April 2022 |work=POLITICO |language=en-US}}
<!-- E -->
* {{Cite journal |last=Engel-DiMauro |first=Salvatore |date=2 January 2021 |title=Anti-Communism and the Hundreds of Millions of Victims of Capitalism |journal=Capitalism Nature Socialism |volume=32 |issue=1 |pages=1–17 |doi=10.1080/10455752.2021.1875603 |s2cid=233745505 |issn=1045-5752}}
* {{cite book |last=Esposito |first=John L. |title=Oxford Encyclopedia of the Modern Islamic World |year=1995 |publisher=[[Organization:Oxford University Press|Oxford University Press]] |location=New York |isbn=978-0195066135 |oclc=94030758 |page=[https://archive.org/details/oxfordencycloped01espo/page/19 19] |url=https://archive.org/details/oxfordencycloped01espo/page/19}}
<!-- G -->
* {{cite book |last1=Gaus |first1=Gerald F. |title=Handbook of Political Theory |first2=Chandran |last2=Kukathas |year=2004 |publisher=Sage |isbn=978-0761967873}}
* {{cite book |last=Ghodsee |first=Kristen |date=2017 |title=Red Hangover: Legacies of Twentieth-Century Communism |url=https://www.dukeupress.edu/red-hangover |publisher=Duke University Press |isbn=978-0822369493 |}}
* {{cite web |last1=Ghodsee |first1=Kristen R. |last2=Sehon |first2=Scott |url=https://aeon.co/essays/the-merits-of-taking-an-anti-anti-communism-stance |title=Anti-anti-communism |date=22 March 2018 |website=Aeon |access-date=26 September 2018 |quote=A 2009 poll in eight east European countries asked if the economic situation for ordinary people was 'better, worse or about the same as it was under communism'. The results stunned observers: 72 per cent of Hungarians, and 62 per cent of both Ukrainians and Bulgarians believed that most people were worse off after 1989. In no country did more than 47 per cent of those surveyed agree that their lives improved after the advent of free markets. Subsequent polls and qualitative research across Russia and eastern Europe confirm the persistence of these sentiments as popular discontent with the failed promises of free-market prosperity has grown, especially among older people.}}
<!-- H -->
* {{cite book |last1=Hanna |first1=Sami A. |last2=Gardner |first2=George H. |title=Arab Socialism: A Documentary Survey |year=1969 |publisher=E.J. Brill |location=Leiden |pages=273–274 |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=zsoUAAAAIAAJ&pg=PA273 |via=[[Google Books]]}}
* {{cite journal |last1=Hanna |first1=Sami A. |year=1969 |title=al-Takaful al-Ijtimai and Islamic Socialism |journal=The Muslim World |volume=59 |issue=3–4 |pages=275–286 |url=http://www.financeinislam.com/article/1_37/1/309 |doi=10.1111/j.1478-1913.1969.tb02639.x |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20100913151901/http://www.financeinislam.com/article/1_37/1/309 |archive-date=13 September 2010}}
* {{cite magazine |last=Heilbroner |first=Robert L. |date=1991 |url=https://www.dissentmagazine.org/article/from-sweden-to-socialism-social-democracy-symposium |title=From Sweden to Socialism: A Small Symposium on Big Questions |magazine=Dissident |access-date=17 April 2020}}
* {{cite book |last=Horvat |first=Branko |date=1982 |title=The Political Economy of Socialism}}
* {{cite book |last1=Horvat |first1=Branko |editor1-last=Michie |editor1-first=Jonathan |editor1-link=Jonathan Michie |title=Reader's Guide to the Social Sciences |volume=1 |date=2000 |publisher=[[Company:Routledge|Routledge]] |location=London and New York |pages=1515–1516 |chapter-url=https://books.google.com/books?id=ip_IAgAAQBAJ&pg=PA1516 |access-date=15 October 2021 |chapter=Social ownership |isbn=978-1135932268 |via=[[Google Books]]}}
<!-- K -->
* {{cite book |last=Kendall |first=Diana |date=2011 |title=Sociology in Our Time: The Essentials |publisher=Cengage Learning |isbn=978-1111305505}}
* {{cite web |last=Kotz |first=David M. |title=Socialism and Capitalism: Are They Qualitatively Different Socioeconomic Systems? |date=December 2006 |access-date=19 February 2011 |publisher=[[Organization:University of Massachusetts|University of Massachusetts]] |url=http://people.umass.edu/dmkotz/Soc_and_Cap_Diff_Syst_06_12.pdf}}
* {{cite news |last=Krause-Jackson |first=Flavia |date=28 December 2019 |title=Socialism declining in Europe as populism support grows |url=https://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/europe/socialism-europe-parties-populism-corbyn-left-wing-francois-holland-snp-a9262656.html |access-date=20 April 2022 |work=The Independent |language=en}}
<!-- L -->
* {{cite book |last1=Lamb |first1=Peter |last2=Docherty |first2=J. C. |title=Historical Dictionary of Socialism |edition=2nd |year=2006 |publisher=The Scarecrow Press |location=Lanham |isbn=978-0810855601}}
* {{cite book |last=Lamb |first=Peter |date=2015 |title=Historical Dictionary of Socialism |edition=3rd |publisher=Rowman & Littlefield |isbn=978-1442258266}}
* {{cite book |last=Li |first=He |date=2015 |title=Political Thought and China's Transformation: Ideas Shaping Reform in Post-Mao China |publisher=Springer |isbn=978-1137427816}}
<!-- M -->
* {{cite book |last=McLaughlin |first=Paul |title=Anarchism and Authority: A Philosophical Introduction to Classical Anarchism |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=kkj5i3CeGbQC |publisher=[[Company:Ashgate Publishing|Ashgate Publishing]] |date=2007 |isbn=9780754661962 |via=[[Google Books]]}}
* {{cite book |last=Meyer |first=Thomas |title=The Theory of Social Democracy |date=2013 |publisher=[[Company:Wiley (publisher)|Wiley]] |isbn=978-0745673523 |oclc=843638352}}
<!-- N -->
* {{cite book |last=Newman |first=Michael |date=2005 |title=Socialism: A Very Short Introduction |publisher=[[Organization:Oxford University Press|Oxford University Press]] |isbn=978-0192804310}}
* {{cite book |last=Nove |first=Alexander |title=The Economics of Feasible Socialism Revisited |date=1991 |publisher=[[Company:Routledge|Routledge]] |isbn=9780044460152}}
<!-- O -->
* {{cite book|last=Orlow|first=Dietrich|year=2000|title=Common Destiny: A Comparative History of the Dutch, French, and German Social Democratic Parties, 1945–1969|location=New York City|publisher=Berghahn Books|isbn=9781571811851}}
* {{cite web |website=Oxford Islamic Studies Online |url=http://www.oxfordislamicstudies.com/article/opr/t125/e30?_hi=0&_pos=5 |title=Abu Dharr al-Ghifari |access-date=23 January 2010 |publisher=Oxford University |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20220310151533/http://www.oxfordislamicstudies.com/article/opr/t125/e30?_hi=0&_pos=5 |archive-date=10 March 2022 |url-status=dead |ref={{sfnref|Oxford Islamic Studies Online}} }}
<!-- P -->
* {{cite book |last=Prychitko |first=David L. |title=Markets, Planning, and Democracy: Essays After the Collapse of Communism |publisher=Edward Elgar Publishing |date=2002 |isbn=978-1840645194}}
<!-- R -->
* {{cite book |last=Robinson |first=Geoffrey B. |date=2018 |title=The Killing Season: A History of the Indonesian Massacres, 1965–66 |url=https://press.princeton.edu/titles/11135.html |publisher=Princeton University Press |isbn=978-1400888863 |access-date=1 August 2018 |archive-date=19 April 2019 |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20190419011656/https://press.princeton.edu/titles/11135.html |url-status=live}}
* {{cite book |last=Roemer |first=John E. |date=1994 |title=A Future for Socialism |publisher=Harvard University Press |isbn=978-067433946-0}}
* {{cite book |last=Roosa |first=John |date=2006 |title=Pretext for Mass Murder: 30 September Movement and Suharto's Coup d'État in Indonesia |location=Madison, Wisconsin |publisher=The University of Wisconsin Press |isbn=978-0299220341}}
* {{cite book |last1=Rosser |first1=Marina V. |last2=Barkley |first2=J. Jr. |title=Comparative Economics in a Transforming World Economy |url=https://archive.org/details/comparativeecono00jrjb |url-access=limited |publisher=MIT Press |year=2003 |isbn=978-0262182348 |pages=[https://archive.org/details/comparativeecono00jrjb/page/n64 53]}}
<!-- S -->
* {{cite web |last=Sanandaji |first=Nima |title=Nordic Countries Aren't Actually Socialist |url=https://foreignpolicy.com/2021/10/27/nordic-countries-not-socialist-denmark-norway-sweden-centrist/ |date=27 October 2021 |access-date=20 April 2022 |website=Foreign Policy |language=en-US}}
* {{cite book |last1=Schweickart |first1=David |last2=Lawler |first2=James |last3=Ticktin |first3=Hillel |last4=Ollman |first4=Bertell |author4-link=Bertell Ollman |date=1998 |title=Market Socialism: The Debate Among Socialists |chapter=The Difference Between Marxism and Market Socialism |publisher=[[Company:Routledge|Routledge]] |isbn=978-0415919678}}
* {{cite book |last=Simpson |first=Bradley |date=2010 |title=Economists with Guns: Authoritarian Development and U.S.–Indonesian Relations, 1960–1968 |publisher=Stanford University Press |isbn=978-0804771825}}
* {{cite book |last=Sinclair |first=Upton |title=Upton Sinclair's: A Monthly Magazine: for Social Justice, by Peaceful Means If Possible |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=i0w9AQAAMAAJ |year=1918 |via=[[Google Books]]}}
* {{cite book |last=Steele |first=David Ramsay |title=From Marx to Mises: Post Capitalist Society and the Challenge of Economic Calculation |publisher=Open Court |date=1999 |isbn=978-0875484495}}
* {{cite news |last1=Sullivan |first1=Dylan |last2=Hickel |first2=Jason |date=2 December 2022 |title=How British colonialism killed 100 million Indians in 40 years |url=https://www.aljazeera.com/opinions/2022/12/2/how-british-colonial-policy-killed-100-million-indians |work=Al Jazeera |location= |access-date=8 February 2023 |quote=While the precise number of deaths is sensitive to the assumptions we make about baseline mortality, it is clear that somewhere in the vicinity of 100 million people died prematurely at the height of British colonialism. This is among the largest policy-induced mortality crises in human history. It is larger than the combined number of deaths that occurred during all famines in the Soviet Union, Maoist China, North Korea, Pol Pot’s Cambodia, and Mengistu’s Ethiopia. |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20230115112349/https://www.aljazeera.com/opinions/2022/12/2/how-british-colonial-policy-killed-100-million-indians |archive-date=15 January 2023}}
<!-- W -->
* {{cite journal |last=Weisskopf |first=Thomas E. |date=1992 |title=Toward a Socialism for the Future, in the Wake of the Demise of the Socialism of the Past |journal=[[Finance:Review of Radical Political Economics|Review of Radical Political Economics]] |volume=24 |issue=3–4 |pages=1–28 |doi=10.1177/048661349202400302 |hdl=2027.42/68447 |s2cid=20456552 |hdl-access=free}}
* {{cite book |last=Woodcock |first=George |title=Anarchism: A History of Libertarian Ideas and Movements |date=1962}}
<!-- Z -->
* {{cite book |last1=Zimbalist |first1=Andrew |last2=Sherman |first2=Howard J. |last3=Brown |first3=Stuart |title=Comparing Economic Systems: A Political-Economic Approach |publisher=Harcourt College Pub |date=1988 |isbn=978-0155124035 |page=[https://archive.org/details/comparingeconomi0000zimb_q8i6/page/7 7] |url=https://archive.org/details/comparingeconomi0000zimb_q8i6/page/7}}
{{refend}}

== Further reading ==
{{refbegin|30em}}
* {{cite book |last=Bellarmine |first=Robert |chapter=Socialism. |title=Sermons from the Latins |year=1902 |publisher=Benziger Brothers |}}
* {{cite book |last1=Cohen |first1=Gerald |title=Why Not Socialism? |publisher=Princeton University Press |date=2009 |isbn=978-0691143613}}
* {{cite book |last1=Cole |first1=G. D. H. |title=History of Socialist Thought, in 7 volumes |orig-date=1965 |publisher=[[Company:Palgrave Macmillan|Palgrave Macmillan]] |date=2003 |edition=reprint |isbn=140390264X}}
* {{cite EB1922 |wstitle=Socialism |last=Cole |first=George Douglas Howard}}
* {{cite book |last1=Ellman |first1=Michael |date=2014 |url=http://www.cambridge.org/US/academic/subjects/economics/economics-general-interest/socialist-planning-3rd-edition |title=Socialist Planning |publisher={{wipe|Cambridge University Press}} |edition=3rd |isbn=978-1107427327}}
* {{cite book |last1=Frank |first1=Peter |last2=McAloon |first2=Jim |title=Labour: The New Zealand Labour Party, 1916–2016 |year=2016 |publisher=Victoria University Press |location=Wellington, New Zealand |isbn=978-1776560745 |url=https://vup.victoria.ac.nz/brands/Peter-Franks-%26-Jim-McAloon.html |access-date=16 September 2019}}
* {{cite book |editor1-last=Fried |editor1-first=Albert |editor2-last=Sanders |editor2-first=Ronald |title=Socialist Thought: A Documentary History |location=Garden City, NY |publisher=Doubleday Anchor |date=1964 |lccn=64011312}}
* {{cite book |last=Ghodsee |first=Kristen |date=2018 |title=Why Women Have Better Sex Under Socialism |url= |location= |publisher=Vintage Books |page= |isbn=978-1568588902}}
* {{cite book |last1=Harrington |first1= Michael |title=Socialism |location=New York |publisher=Bantam |date=1972 |lccn=76154260}}
* {{cite book |last1=Harrington |first1= Michael |title=Socialism: Past and Future |publisher=Arcade Publishing |date=2011 |isbn=978-1611453355}}
* {{cite journal |last1=Hayes |first1=Carlton J. H. |title=The History of German Socialism Reconsidered |journal=American Historical Review |date=1917 |volume=23 |issue=1 |pages=62–101 |doi=10.2307/1837686 |jstor=1837686}}
* {{cite encyclopedia |last=Heilbroner |first=Robert |editor-first=David R. |editor-last=Henderson |encyclopedia=The Concise Encyclopedia of Economics |chapter=Socialism |chapter-url=https://www.econlib.org/library/Enc/Socialism.html |year=2008 |publisher=Liberty Fund |location=Indianapolis, IN |isbn=978-0865976665 |pages=466–468}}
* {{cite book |last1=Imlay |first1=Talbot |title=The Practice of Socialist Internationalism: European Socialists and International Politics, 1914–1960 |publisher=[[Organization:Oxford University Press|Oxford University Press]] |date=2018 |doi=10.1093/oso/9780199641048.001.0001 |isbn=9780191774317}}
* {{cite book |last1=Itoh |first1=Makoto |title=Political Economy of Socialism |location=London |publisher=Macmillan |date=1995 |isbn=0333553373}}
* {{cite book |last=Kitching |first=Gavin |title=Rethinking Socialism |publisher=Meuthen |year=1983 |url=https://archive.org/details/rethinkingsocial0000kitc |isbn=978-0416358407}}
* {{cite book |last1=Oskar |first1=Lange |title=On the Economic Theory of Socialism |location=Minneapolis, MN |publisher=University of Minnesota Press |date=1938 |lccn=38012882}}
* {{cite journal |last1=Lebowitz |first1=Michael |url=http://www.monthlyreview.org/builditnow.htm |title=Build It Now: Socialism for the 21st century |journal=Monthly Review Press |date=2006 |isbn=1583671455}}
* {{cite book |last=Lichtheim |first=George |title=A Short History of Socialism |publisher=Praeger Publishers |date=1970 |isbn=}}
* {{cite book |last=Maass |first=Alan |title=The Case for Socialism |publisher=[[Company:Haymarket Books|Haymarket Books]] |date=2010 |edition=Updated |isbn=978-1608460731}}
* Marx & Engels, ''Selected works in one volume'', Lawrence and Wishart (1968) {{ISBN|978-0853151814}}.
* {{cite book |last=Muravchik |first=Joshua |title=Heaven on Earth: The Rise and Fall of Socialism |url=https://www.pbs.org/heavenonearth/resources.html |archive-url=https://web.archive.org/web/20141019012658/http://www.pbs.org/heavenonearth/resources.html |archive-date=19 October 2014 |location=San Francisco |publisher=Encounter Books |date=2002 |isbn=1893554457}}
* {{cite journal |last1=Navarro |first1=V. |date=1992 |title=Has socialism failed? An analysis of health indicators under socialism |url= |journal=International Journal of Health Services |volume=23 |issue=2 |pages=583–601 |doi=10.2190/B2TP-3R5M-Q7UP-DUA2 |pmid=1399170 |s2cid=44945095 |access-date=}}
* Bertell Ollman, ed., ''Market Socialism: The Debate among Socialists'', Routledge, 1998. {{ISBN|0415919673}}.
* [[Biography:Leo Panitch|Leo Panitch]], ''Renewing Socialism: Democracy, Strategy, and Imagination''. {{ISBN|0813398215}}.
* Emile Perreau-Saussine, ''[https://web.archive.org/web/20090206081900/http://www.polis.cam.ac.uk/contacts/staff/eperreausaussine/what_is_left_of_socialism.pdf What remains of socialism?]'', in Patrick Riordan (dir.), Values in Public life: aspects of common goods (Berlin, LIT Verlag, 2007), pp.&nbsp;11–34.
* {{cite book |last=Piketty |first=Thomas |date=2021 |title=Time for Socialism: Dispatches from a World on Fire, 2016–2021 |url=https://yalebooks.yale.edu/book/9780300259667/time-socialism |publisher=Yale University Press |isbn=978-0300259667}}
* {{cite book |last=Pipes |first=Richard |title=Property and Freedom |publisher=Vintage |date=2000 |isbn=0375704477}}
* {{cite encyclopedia |last=Prychitko |first=David L. |editor-first=Ronald |editor-last=Hamowy |encyclopedia=The Encyclopedia of Libertarianism |chapter=Socialism |chapter-url=https://sk.sagepub.com/reference/libertarianism/n290.xml |url=https://books.google.com/books?id=yxNgXs3TkJYC |doi=10.4135/9781412965811.n290 |year=2008 |publisher=[[Company:SAGE Publishing|Sage]]; [[Organization:Cato Institute|Cato Institute]] |location=Thousand Oaks, CA |isbn=978-1412965804 <!-- |oclc=750831024 |lccn=2008009151 --> |pages=474–476 |via=[[Google Books]]}}
* {{cite book |last1=Rubel |first1=Maximilien |last2=Crump |first2=John |title=Non-Market Socialism in the Nineteenth and Twentieth Centuries |date=8 August 1987 |publisher=St. Martin's Press |isbn=0312005245}}
* {{cite book |last=Sassoon |first=Donald |title=One Hundred Years of Socialism: The West European Left in the Twentieth Century |publisher=New Press |date=1998 |isbn=1565844866}}
* {{cite book |editor-last=Sunkara |editor-first=Bhaskar |title=The ABCs of Socialism |publisher=Verso Books |date=2016 |isbn=978-1784787264}}
* {{cite book |last=Verdery |first=Katherine |title=What Was Socialism, What Comes Next |location=Princeton |publisher=Princeton University Press |date=1996 |isbn=069101132X}}
* {{cite web |last=Webb |first=Sidney |url=https://sourcebooks.fordham.edu/mod/1889webb.asp |title=The Basis of Socialism – Historic |year=1889 |publisher=Library of Economics and Liberty |}}
* {{cite book |last=Weinstein |first=James |title=Long Detour: The History and Future of the American Left |publisher=[[Organization:Westview Press|Westview Press]] |date=2003 |edition=hardcover |isbn=0813341043}}
* {{cite book |last=Wilberg |first=Peter |url=http://www.newgnosis.co.uk/deep.html |title=Deep Socialism: A New Manifesto of Marxist Ethics and Economics |date=2003 |publisher=New Gnosis Publications |isbn=1904519024}}
{{refend}}

== External links ==
* [https://www.britannica.com/topic/socialism Socialism] – entry at ''Britannica.com''
* {{curlie|Society/Politics/Socialism/|Socialism}}
* {{IEP|socialis/}}
* [https://web.archive.org/web/20120208125248/http://repository.library.georgetown.edu/handle/10822/552531 Cuban Socialism] from the [https://web.archive.org/web/20160115205405/https://repository.library.georgetown.edu/handle/10822/552494 Dean Peter Krogh Foreign Affairs Digital Archives].
* {{cite EB9 |wstitle=Socialism |volume=XXII |last= Kirkup |first= Thomas |page= |short=1}}
* {{cite NIE |last1=Ely |first1=Richard T. |last2=Adams |first2=Thomas Sewall |wstitle=Socialism |short=x}}
* {{cite EB1922 |last=Cole |first=G. D. H. |wstitle=Socialism |short=x}}

{{socialism}}
{{Navboxes
|list=
{{aspects of capitalism}}
{{political ideologies}}
{{social and political philosophy}}
{{Western culture}}
}}
{{subject bar|portal1=Socialism||portal2=Communism|portal3=Organized Labour|portal4=Anarchism|portal5=Libertarianism|portal6=Society|portal7=Politics|portal8=Economics|wikt=yes|commons=yes|commons-search=Category:Socialism|q=yes|s=yes|s-search=Portal:Socialism|b=yes|d=yes|d-search=Q7272}}

[[Category:Socialism| ]]
[[Category:Economic ideologies]]
[[Category:Economic systems]]
[[Category:Political movements]]

{{Sourceattribution|Socialism}}