Thoughts and Notes on Socialism: Utopian and Scientific

This book was a rebuttal to those who challenged Marx. Materialism supports agnosticism, according to Hobbs. Reality is our perception based on our experience, which is recorded as historic materialism. Taking down feudalism meant dealing with religion. The bourgeoisie would use religion to keep workers in line and control them so that they could profit as much as possible. There became a divide between religious and agnostic materialism, leading to the declaration of the rights of man.

The industrial revolution split power between the capitalists and the workers, and the workers formed the working man's party, 'the chartists'. By 1851, the workers' power was crushed. The bourgeoisie turned to the Salvation Army to keep down the workers. The bourgeoisie, or middle class, still saw themselves as inferior to the upper class and worked to maintain the status quo of staying inferior. Politicians selected were a way to promote individual bourgeoisie into an elite status while keeping the rest of the bourgeoisie's class held down.

The working party, however, would join the liberal party and become the radical wing. In Europe in the 1880s, the working class started to gain power, but due to the system and the views in tradition, like the bourgeoisie, the working class still thought they were inferior to the class above them. To maintain this, religion was used to manipulate the people. The bourgeoisie insisted that there could only be two parties: liberal and conservative. (Note: In modern society, the two parties unite to eliminate other parties to the point they are uniparty; at the same time, cultural mindsets among society work against the people to hold everyone down.)

In the 19th century, the working class in Britain slowly embraced socialist ideas and took action, even if they weren't always using the exact terminology. Compared to other European countries, like Germany, Britain lagged behind in terms of working-class movements. Germany was at the forefront of leading the class movements. Modern socialism is the hostilities between capitalists and wage workers and, in theory, the philosophies of the 18th-century French, Bourgeoisie reason, law, and democracy, which the proletariat would occasionally uprise against.

Saint-Simon, Fourier, and Owen sought not to free any one class but all of humanity, as bourgeoisie society is unjust. (For this to occur, humanity must unite as one people.) Socialism was formed out of reason. However, the more socialism was planned out, the more utopian it became. The battle between the 'owners and workers became clear in the 19th century. Equality for women became clear, as did the worsening conditions for the poverty class. Humans are that of their upbringing and that of their environment. The better the conditions for the people, the better the society. And no matter how good conditions are under capitalism, they are always temporary.

At the time of this book, three things stood in the way of communism in Ireland: private property, marriage, and religion. Owen advocated and achieved some reform, proving the merchant and the manufacturer were unnecessary. And we temporarily united the unions. Socialism and communism are a mishmash of ideas based on individual perspectives with no agreeable direction. And with cherry-picked theory, especially when it comes to the dictatorship of the proletariat and the transition of the state.

Dialectics and metaphysical philosophy make everything in natural science black or white. Nature works dialectically but not metaphysically. Leading back to modern materialism and the evolution of humanity. Therefore, we conclude that modern materialism is dialectic. All history is that of class struggle and the economics of the time, which leads to the conclusion that socialism is the necessary outcome of the struggle between the proletariat and the bourgeoisie classes?

The problem with capitalism that leads to its downfall is surplus value, or profits. For those who think this is just 'white man ideas,' a Chinese philosopher came to the same conclusion as European ones on this. Thus, this isn't a 'white man' idea but a human realization. The history of materialism starts with the basic needs of life and how they are produced and shared. Solving humanity's problems will come down to changes in production and distribution. Social order must and will change with necessary economic change.

Production is in conflict with capitalist distribution. Modern socialism is the concern of those struggling under capitalism. The means of production and producers were socialized, but capitalism treats neither as such. Socialized production is incompatible with capitalist appropriation. Capitalism requires people to permanently be wage workers. As production evolves and becomes more efficient, the need for workers becomes less and less, increasing those in poverty. And approximately every decade, the capitalist system crashes and resets itself. It is a never-ending cycle.

Regulating the amount of production via trusts has proven to fail, leading to monopolies of products. And as it fails, production conditions lead to state control. The state being bourgeoisie and capitalist in itself. To solve the problems, society must seize the means of production and distribution. And enforce social regulation of both. The state cannot be abolished until it represents everyone, and anything that divides and segregates the people (not just financial status) is destroyed, at which time the state dies out. Only then can anarchists realize their aspirations for a stateless society.