I thought it might be worth reminding those who already knew, and sharing with the many whom I imagine didn't know, that the man many consider to be the smartest fellow of the 20th century, was also a Socialist. And, as one would guess, Albert Einstein was no ordinary socialist. He put forth his views regarding the matter in what I would think must be regarded as one of the most brilliant, and important, essays of modern times entitled, "Why Socialism?" The article was originally published in the first issue of "Monthly Review" ("An Independent Socialist Magazine") in May of 1949. It was subsequently published in May 1998 to commemorate the first issue of MR‘s fiftieth year.
The first half of the essay devotes itself to summarizing humanity's development until modern times (in a way I honestly would think hard to match in such brief compass), and then gets to the nitty-gritty. We almost think "Hey! Al thinks pretty much just like we do!":
Private capital tends to become concentrated in few hands, partly because of competition among the capitalists, and partly because technological development and the increasing division of labor encourage the formation of larger units of production at the expense of smaller ones. The result of these developments is an oligarchy of private capital the enormous power of which cannot be effectively checked even by a democratically organized political society. This is true since the members of legislative bodies are selected by political parties, largely financed or otherwise influenced by private capitalists who, for all practical purposes, separate the electorate from the legislature. The consequence is that the representatives of the people do not in fact sufficiently protect the interests of the underprivileged sections of the population. Moreover, under existing conditions, private capitalists inevitably control, directly or indirectly, the main sources of information (press, radio, education). It is thus extremely difficult, and indeed in most cases quite impossible, for the individual citizen to come to objective conclusions and to make intelligent use of his political rights.
But lest we become to sanguine, we quickly are reminded of whom we're dealing with here. Prof. Einstein goes on to limn the contours of some of the most serious problems and challenges which differentiate between merely "a planned economy" and true socialism. My own greatest concern (for what it's worth...) is that the way most of us have been speaking about socialism either ignores, doesn't acknowledge or simply glosses over what Prof Einstein considered the main problem- and which I don't think can be interpreted here as merely economic:
"Production is carried on for profit, not for use. There is no provision that all those able and willing to work will always be in a position to find employment; an “army of unemployed” almost always exists. The worker is constantly in fear of losing his job. Since unemployed and poorly paid workers do not provide a profitable market, the production of consumers’ goods is restricted, and great hardship is the consequence. Technological progress frequently results in more unemployment rather than in an easing of the burden of work for all. The profit motive, in conjunction with competition among capitalists, is responsible for an instability in the accumulation and utilization of capital which leads to increasingly severe depressions. Unlimited competition leads to a huge waste of labor, and to that crippling of the social consciousness of individuals which I mentioned before. This crippling of individuals I consider the worst evil of capitalism. Our whole educational system suffers from this evil. An exaggerated competitive attitude is inculcated into the student, who is trained to worship acquisitive success as a preparation for his future career."
The bottom line, I believe, is that the great man was saying: our prime concern should ultimately be regarding the psychological, emotional, as well as intellectual health, of each individual. (Or what nowadays, is sometimes simply referred to as, yes, "spiritual".). In other words: a truly sane economic system should primarily be focused on producing true human beings, not (primarily) products, or even an equitable distribution of wealth. Many, of course, will regard all of this as nothing new, and to a great extent it's not. But considering the challenges before us, I think just having this particular fellow on our side is a distinct boon. And whatever one's interpretation, philosophical orientation, or "already-know-it-all" status, I believe the essay itself is also a boon, and should be read (once again by clicking here), discussed and shared, as often, and as seriously as possible.