What should be the minimum requirements for membership of a Socialist Party? They should be broad enough to include all who are Socialists. There is no justification for barring Socialists from membership. They should be narrow enough to exclude all who are not Socialists.
Since the criterion for membership is based on whether an applicant is a Socialist or not, it becomes necessary to define what is a socialist.
Broadly speaking, a Socialist is one who understands that Capitalism can no longer be reformed or administered in the interests of the working class or of society; that Capitalism is incapable of eliminating its inherent problems of poverty, wars, crises, etc.; and that Socialism offers the solutions for the social problems besetting mankind, since the material developments, with the single exception of an aroused Socialist majority, are now ripe for the inauguration of Socialism.
This is the Socialist case. It is not difficult to grasp. Membership in a Socialist organization does not require being erudite pundits or profound students. There is a unity of agreement among us that the above is the minimum requirement of being a Socialist.
However, there is a justifiable fear that there is a danger that we may open the doors to confused “Socialists,” non-Socialists, or even anti- Socialists. This fear exists because a Socialist party is democratically controlled by its membership. An influx of such elements could transform a genuine a Socialist party into its opposite. Therefore, we must summarize the barest minimum of Socialist principles upon which all Socialists agree and upon which there is no compromise. The principles that weld us together with a unity of views may be stated as follows:
Socialist Principles
Socialism has three aspects, viz., a science, a movement, and a system of society.
As a science, it is materialistic. It recognizes that everything in existence is interrelated and in a constant process of change. (In a very real sense, it might even be considered that Socialism is the science that integrates all branches of science into a correlated whole.) Specifically, it explains social evolution and, more particularly, the nature of Capitalist society.
As a movement, its very essence is to exert all its efforts to arouse the working class and all others to become Socialists so that the majority become conscious of her interests and institute Socialism. The Socialist revolution is majority, conscious, and political. Such a revolution is inherently democratic.
As a system of society, it may be concisely described as a social relationship where the interests of every member of society and society as a whole are in harmony; where everyone cooperates by giving according to his abilities and receiving according to his needs.
On these Socialist principles, there is no compromise. On these Socialist generalizations, it might be said we are dogmatic. Our dogmatism applies to processes and scientific analyses. (On the other hand, we do not have any authoritarian dogmas or creeds. See E. W.’s splendid comments on the Bolshevik behavior, in this respect, in the April 1953 Socialist Standard.)
Further, we do not compromise with the Capitalist system. We oppose it and are organized to get rid of it. Nor do we compromise in our defense of the Socialist case and Socialist principles.
Finally, the above Socialist summary is what distinguishes us from all other parties claiming to be Socialist. No other party, outside the companion parties for Socialism, holds these views. That is why it is unlikely that there would be two Socialist parties in any one country. Should another Socialist organization appear on the scene, steps would be taken to merge — we are not engaged in a rivalry to emancipate the workers.
THE Socialist attitude
The Socialist attitude should be one of constantly re-examining our position and activities, especially in the light of unfolding events. Forum is a healthy and sound demonstration of such a Socialist attitude. It is a valuable asset in illustrating the fact that thinking is not a violation of Socialist discipline. Socialists must not be afraid to think or express opinions lest they be brought up on charges. To those who view the companion parties as being rigid sectarians, Forum is a living refutation. In a socialist party there is plenty of room for differences of opinions.
Whilst it might be said that Socialists are dogmatic, in the scientific sense, on fundamental Socialist principles, i.e., on generalizations and processes, they should not be dogmatic on specific details. We are on solid ground as long as we confine ourselves to scientific analyses of processes. The moment we become specific in telling history what it must do, what it can only do, etc., history can make liars out of us. Speculations are useful and interesting but not fundamental. Also, we can be sadly mistaken in laying down formulas to be adhered to for all types of problems and situations. Witness the quarrel in Forum regarding the printers’ union (strike-censorship issues).
Illustrative of my point is A. Turner’s article in the March issue. It does not take much imagination to hear some rumbling that Comrade Turner has “repudiated” the class struggle and should be brought up for charges. Can anyone argue that the Socialist revolution is in the interest of all mankind, including the Capitalists? We become dogmatic (in the Bolshevik-Catholic sense of authoritarian dogma) to consider Turner’s viewpoint as anti-Socialist.
Still more effective illustration is the article in the April 1953 Forum suggesting (horror of horrors) a “revolutionary” revamping of our Declaration of Principles. Comrades can hold such views and still be members of a Socialist party; for, are they not Socialists?
One additional word regarding what is a Socialist. He is not only one who understands and agrees with the Socialist case but also does something about it. Of course, in all fairness, consideration must be given to personal problems and special circumstances.
Related posts:
