Customer Reviews

Socialist Phenomenon

5 star:		(5)
4 star:		(1)
3 star:		(1)
2 star:		(0)
1 star:		(0)

 

 

I can not claim to be a terrific scholar of economics or history but this struck me as the most significant writing I have ever came across on (the title is precise) the "socialist phenomenon." The author is a world-class mathematician, with dozens of math books (in English) for sale. The preface to this work is by Solshenitsyn, who explains the reason a mathametician had to write it was that the Soviet's "maximum leaders" had killed all the sociologists and humanists who might otherwise have written it. It is a total condemnation based on world historical evidence of socialism. Not a cheery thesis: the author says tht socialism is the way of all the world except for a tiny window over less than 3 millennia in the West that opened to freedom, initiative, and science. My query is, why is such an extraordinary and valuable work out of print?

King Solomon would've agreed with the author, a Soviet-era Russian mathematician, in his contention that the impulse to seek utopia is deeply rooted in the human psyche. Examining pre-Christian communal societies, both actual ones (Pythagorians) and fictional (Plato's "Republic"), he found commonalities with many of the major heresies of Christianity. Of the latter, Schafrevich divided those of ancient and medaeval origin from those occurring from the time of the Reformation onward. The earlier hereises, such as the Cathars, Paulicians, and Bogomils)generally had in common ascetism gnostic traits, and looked to the next world for their Paradise, regardless of their living arrangements here on Earth.
The author plausibly argues for a continuous strand of existence for the core heretical doctrines, by making a case for the earliest groups having passed their beliefs on to the latter ones. (The Bogomil-Albagensian connection is well established, in this regard.) Along with Plato, these groups advocated the communality of women as the major departure from their asceticism. (The family unit arguably is the basis of private property; groups having all in common, including wives and children, have no basis for the accumulation of inhereted wealth.)
Later heresies tended to favor the bringing about of the Kingdom of God on Earth, now, by putting their beliefs into action. Noting the linkage between some modern Christian denominations and earlier medaeval heresies (groups sometimes mis-classified as "Protestant"), the author shows how the drive for Earthly Paradise gradually dispensed with God, until the movements became wholly socialist, as in Saint-Simonism.

The author describes the workings of actual socialist states throughout history. The prime examples given are Pharonic Egypt and the Inca. Of the latter, Schafrevich notes how eerily it resembled Thomas More's "Utopia" in several aspects, even though More wrote a generation before Pizarro. Of the Inca, the author says that they had the best examplye of an isolated, socialist state, and he notes that the social and intellectual life of the Inca resembled an anthill, not a Workers Paradise. Unlike some leading economists (von Mises), Schafrevich believes that socialism is workable, but that the result, if carried through to the fullest practical application, resembles the Incan anthill, where only one will matters, and human nature is so deformed that even a century later, Jesuits noted that the people posessed no independant will to action. (In this regard, he more nearly resembles Nobel Laureate Frederich von Hayek, who believed that socialism could practically exist, but that the result would be a grossly inefficient totalitarianism.)
Schafrevich concludes that Socialism/Communism is perhaps the greatest heresy, an attempt to have Man become Creator of His own Paradise on Earth. The hollowing out of the faith of many Protestant and other non-orthodox faiths leaves behing people who believe in doing works to bring about the Great Society, but they do so without reference to God. These people became the Dzerhezinskis of the Communist movement.
As a history of heretical theology, this book is outstanding. As a guide to the animating force that impels people to advance Socialism, in the face of overwhelming evidence that it is unworkable and contradictory, it is peerless.
-Lloyd A. Conway

Might be a bit boring for the non-historian but extremely insightful. Worth reading if you want to understand history. Most of the facts in this book were new to me, and that is uncommon for a history book.

Shafarevich claims that socialism is the default condition of the human race. He proves that nearly every ancient regime was basically socialist: from Mesopotamia to China. The most socialistic out of them all was the Inca Empire. Nobody owned property, children were collectively raised, the government assigned where you lived, what clothes you wear, and what haircut you get. People worked constantly on collective farms until they died of hunger or disease. He describes socialist-religious cults that would terrorize medieval Europe by capturing states, imposing socialist rule, and massacring hundreds in every village. He shows amazing similarities between religion and socialism. Shafarevich explains that the only time when mankind has not lived under socialism was when principles such as individual rights and democracy were enforced, first in Greece, then England, then finally America: the closest man every got to capitalism.

--Ron Cogan, Upstate NY

_The Socialist Phenomenon_, first published in Russian in 1975 and translated here into English by William Tjalsma, by dissident Russian mathematician Igor Shafarevich is a brilliant examination of the history and development of socialism tracing its origins back to ancient times and the medieval heresies to its supposed scientific development under Karl Marx and his followers. Igor Shafarevich (1923 - ) was a dissident Russian mathematician who founded an important school in algebraic number theory and algebraic geometry and who also wrote on political matters. Shafarevich was a friend of the late Nobel Prize winning novelist Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn (who provides a Foreword to this book) and served as an important critic of the Soviet regime and of future liberal proposals for the development of Russia. This book which was widely read in the West, provides a unique history of socialism tracing the origins of socialism from ancient times, through the medieval heretics, through philosophers and novelists in more recent times, and ultimately to its supposed scientific pretensions under Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels and their followers. In many ways, the understanding provided here by Shafarevich is similar to that of certain other modern political thinkers including Erik Voegelin (who traced the origins of the political religions, including Marxism, back to the ancient Gnostics and through the medieval heretics), Erik von Kuehnelt-Leddihn (who traced the roots of leftism to medieval heresy), or Norman Cohn (who traced the history of revolutionary movements through the middle ages and beyond). Shafarevich writes from the perspective of a Russian Orthodox Christian and a Russian nationalist and as such provides a unique understanding in this light. The book is also heavily indebted to the economic history of Karl Wittfogel who provided a detailed study of what he termed "Oriental despotism" and related this to modern day socialist movements and Marxism. The book provides a fascinating study on the history of socialism and an examination of the problems within socialist doctrines as held by Marxists. As such, this book remains an important and courageous book showing the errors that lie within the socialist impulse (which Shafarevich ultimately finds to be rooted within the death instinct) and unveils the Soviet state for the monstrosity it was.

This book begins with a Foreword by Russian novelist Solzhenitsyn which explains the importance of Shafarevich's work and details the rise of socialism in the Twentieth century in both "Asiatic" and "Russian" aberrations. Following this appears a Preface, in which the author lays out his understanding of the crises of the Twentieth century leading up to a much more profound crisis. The author quotes from F. Heichelheim regarding the economic history of man showing how the trends of the Late Capitalist Age have led to the end of the development of economic individualism and to a return to Ancient Oriental models which were laid down at the beginning of the Iron Age. The author sees socialism as an important aspect of the developing crisis of man which is leading to the destruction of the "old world" and argues that fundamentally socialism lacks a "definition free from contradictions". The author will trace the history of socialism from ancient times through the medieval heresies to philosophers and novelists and finally to the supposed "scientific" socialism of _The Communist Manifesto_. The rest of the Preface lays out the plan for the book. Part One of the book is entitled "Chiliastic Socialism" and begins with an Introduction. Here, the author explains that socialism can mean both a doctrine and an appeal based on it for changing life as well as a social structure that exists in time and space. The author comments on the "classic" writings of Karl Marx, socialism as it exists in the U.S.S.R. and the People's Republic of China, and the visit of novelist and thinker H. G. Wells to Russia. The author next considers socialism as a doctrine, considering what he refers to as "chiliastic socialism" (the belief in the thousand-year Kingdom of God on earth). The author quotes from Aristophanes comparing Athenian socialism to the modern _Communist Manifesto_ attempting to show how all socialisms share the same three components: abolition of private property, abolition of the family (i.e. communality of wives and disruption of the bonds between parents and children), and purely material prosperity. Following this, the author turns to "The Socialism of Antiquity" which consists of a discussion of the state as laid out by Plato in _The Republic_ and _Laws_, showing the role of the "philosophers" (which Bulgakov argues should be referred to as "the righteous men" or the "saints") in Plato's ideal state as well as the communality of property and Plato's castes. This section also discusses certain socialist ideals mentioned by Diodorus and various Gnostic sects mentioned by early Christian Fathers. Following this, appears a section entitled "The Socialism of the Heresies", mentioning the role of socialism for the medieval heresies which persisted up to the time of the Reformation. The author provides a "General Survey" discussing such movements as the Cathars (or "pure ones"), the Brethren of the Free Spirit or Apostolic Brethren, the Taborites, the Anabaptists, and Sects in the English Revolution of 1648 (including the Diggers and Levellers). This "General Survey" ends with an Appendix which includes Three Biographies including Dolcino and the Apostolic Brethren, Thomas Muntzer, and Johann of Leyden and the "New Jerusalem" in Munster. Following this appears a section entitled "Chiliastic Socialism and the Ideology of the Heretical Movements" providing a detailed examination of the heretical movements and their relationship to orthodox Christianity. The third section of this part is entitled "The Socialism of the Philosophers" and discusses "The Great Utopias" (mentioning _Utopia_ by Thomas More, _City of the Sun_ by Tommaso Campanella, and "The Law of Freedom" by Gerrard Winstanley). Following this, appears a discussion of "The Socialist Novel" (mentioning several important early socialist novels) and "The Age of Enlightenment" (detailing the role of socialism in Enlightenment thought), and a section entitled "The First Steps" (explaining the origins of the revolution in France) as well as a "Summary". Part Two of the book is entitled "State Socialism" and explains various cases of the socialist state in practice. This part begins with a section on "South America" including mention of "The Inca Empire", and "The Jesuit State in Paraguay". Following this appears a section entitled "The Ancient Orient" including discussion of "Mesopotamia", "Ancient Egypt" (with an Appendix entitled "Religion in Ancient Egypt and Mesopotamia"), "Ancient China" (with an Appendix entitled "Was There Such a Thing as an "Asiatic Social Formation?"), and a "Summary". The discussion of China entails a discussion of Shang Yang who maintained that "When the people are weak the state is strong; when the state is weak the people are strong" and a discussion of the ideas of Wittfogel concerning "Oriental despotism" and relating this to the theories of Marx. Part Three of the book is entitled "Analysis" and examines the question of the phenomenon of socialism. This part begins with a section entitled "The Contours of Socialism" discussing such aspects of socialism as "The Abolition of Private Property", "The Abolition of the Family", "The Abolition of Religion", and "Communality or Equality" and relating all of these to the theories of Karl Marx. Following this appears a section entitled "Survey of Some Approaches to Socialism" which includes parts discussing various notions of socialism entitled "The Marxist standpoint", "Socialist teachings as scientific theory" (relating Marx to Fourier and noting such things as the importance of science at the time of Marx and his need to make his theory grounded in science, but also noting Marx's deficiencies in understanding mathematics and other areas of economics), "Socialism is the theory of preparing and implementing revolution: it is a series of rules which must be followed in order to seize power. At the same time, it is the technology of power, the philosophy of the absolute state to which all life is subjected - - i.e. statism", a section discussing socialism as based on compulsory labor, "Socialism as such does not exist. That which is called socialism is one of the lines of development of capitalism - state capitalism", "Socialism is the expression of the quest for social justice", "Socialism is a special religion", "Socialism is a consequence of atheism, the conclusion to which atheism leads in the field of social relations". The author finds all these notions to be problematic in their own ways while at the same time mentioning such facts about Marx as his unquenchable hatred of the existing order, his intolerance, his atheism and God-hatred, his failures to understand certain facts of economics, his hypocrisy in his reliance upon the capitalist Engels for financial support, the failure of his predictions, his reliance upon the labour theory of value which has been largely superseded by marginal utility, and his dismissal of others who tried to improve the lot of humanity and the poor such as Charles Dickens as mere "bourgeois philanthropists". There is also a discussion of Freud in relation to Marx and the theories of the New Left particularly mentioning Marcuse. Further, there is a discussion of Dostoyevsky concerning socialism as atheism. Following this, appears a section entitled "The Embodiment of the Socialist Ideal" which includes parts discussing "Economy", "The Organization of Labor", "Family", "Culture", and "Religion". This is followed by a section entitled "Socialism and Individuality" which discusses the idea of equality and the theories of Marcuse. Finally, there appears a section entitled "The Goal of Socialism" in which the author relates socialism to the goal of the death of all mankind. The author writes, "The death of mankind is not only a conceivable result of the triumph of socialism - it constitutes the goal of socialism." The book ends with a Conclusion in which the author re-affirms his position on socialism as rooted in the goal of the death of all mankind and relates it to various philosophical positions including Hinayana Buddhism, the philosophy of Schopenhauer, Hegel's system, Sartre's philosophy, and La Mettrie's idea of man as machine ultimately relating all of this to an idea of Soloviev that man must pass through a nihilistic phase on the way to a faith in God. The author concludes that socialists have accomplished little in the way of improving the lot of humanity (such accomplishments being nearly always achieved by men dismissed by Marx as "bourgeois philanthropists") and relates this to the unique experiences of Russia.

This book offers a fascinating study of the socialist phenomenon which fully examines and refutes the theories and predictions of Karl Marx by tracing their roots in ancient systems and medieval heresy. This book is important because it was written by a dissident Russian mathematician who bravely unveiled the Soviet state for the monstrosity that it truly was. It is highly recommended for those who seek to understand the roots of socialism and the crises of the Twentieth century.

Igor Shafarevich's book, "The Socialist Phenomenon", first became widely know in the West when Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn mentioned it in his commencement address to Harvard University in 1978. An edition in Russian had been published three years earlier in Paris.

While Shafarevich is a world-renowned mathematician by profession, this venture into history is a remarkable example of the breadth of his interests and learning. As Solzhenitsyn noted in his preface to this book, the profession of historian being almost extinct in the Soviet Union (except for Party hacks of whom it was joked that none of them could predict the past), it was necessary for physical scientists and mathematicians (who had some mental space for creative work since the Party needed their discoveries for military purposes) to stand in for their massacred colleagues in history and the social sciences.

Shafarevich notes that Socialism (defined here to mean movements or societies that attempt to monopolize all means of production) bears a number of recurring characteristics throughout history: the abolition of private property, abolition of the family, abolition of religion, and communality or equality. While some of these characteristics are certainly familiar enough from the example of Communism, others are lesser known. In the earliest days of the Soviet state, various experiments in cohabitation by men and women were permitted on the grounds that the family was a `bourgeois' institution that should be superseded and allowed to die out. For a time at least, childbearing out of wedlock was encouraged on the grounds that children could be better brought-up in state-run institutions while mothers worked. These experiments so disordered a society already reeling under forcible collectivization, the imprisonment and mass-murder of `suspect' classes, and economic collapse; that the Bolsheviks soon abandoned them. Far from being innovative, the origins of these ideas go back at least as far as Plato, and recur frequently throughout the history of utopian Socialism, as Shafarevich abundantly and cogently illustrates with examples drawn from a number of cultures widely separated in time and space.

Shafarevich is especially astute in his observations of various medieval chiliastic groups, of which he considerers Communism to be a sort of modern-day offshoot. In them the goal of commonality and equality were typically taken to grotesque extremes, including not only commonality of goods (no private property--not even personal possessions), but frequently commonality of wives as well, i.e., every man could have sexual relations with whichever woman he fancied. This stress on perfect equality ultimately works itself out in the infliction and, even the willing self-infliction of mass death (certainly the one state in which all human beings are completely alike).

Shafarevich writes with all the passion of a Russian patriot and Orthodox Christian repulsed at the effects, both moral and material, of decades of Soviet Communism on his homeland. Anyone expecting a dry treatise will not find one here. It is here, perhaps, where Shafarevich's thesis finds its gravest weakness as well as its greatest strength Shafarevich's view of history is passionate--and brilliantly insightful for this, yet it is (perhaps necessarily) impressionistic. Although many of his observations have been independently confirmed by Western scholars such as Norman Cohn and Karl Wittfogel; Shafarevich's linking of utopian socialism and the `scientific' socialism that displaced it is not quite as self-evident as he would claim--though it is suggestive. Yet this only means that it is now necessary for other scholars to take up these questions anew, and research them more thoroughly. The credit for blazing this trail goes to Shafarevich, and however wrongheaded some of his most recent work may be, he deserves praise for researching and writing this book under arduous conditions, and for his courage in seeing to it that it would see print--whatever the consequences to him.

I first read this book in the early 1980s and loved it because of its breadth and scope. It completely dispelled the common myth that socialism or collectivism was created in the timeframe of the 18th century French Revolution...or by Karl Marx. It had nothing to do with achieving economic parity and happiness through equitable distribution of materials and wealth. It was always a system of domination and control over the "masses" by ruthless and merciless psychopaths much like the ones who rule today, except that they didn't have to present a rationale to an educated public.

I think the fact that Shafarevich did not feel any debt to the western educational establishment allowed him to present a case that didn't romanticize his subject at all. He looks at collectivist philosophy coldly and without sentiment towards it. In fact it is evident that he found little if anything at all redeeming in the collectivist model.

The ancient Chinese, Incas, Greeks and all other so-called socialist civilizations were more similar than different in their basic philosophical underpinnings; and stand in sharp contrast to the individualism of the recent West. He demonstrates what a rare and precarious thing that individualism has been throughout history; and the spectacular loss it would be to let modern romanticists, dreamers, and lazy ignorant conformists drag the human race back into the misery and mediocrity that is collectivism...regardless of the form it takes.

This was a personal recommendation from a friend, based on his reading of Solzhenitsyn's preface, which is much better than the book......
It's an ok book, some interesting examples, but not something to write home about.
The author is Russian and this experience is what drives the book. It is his desire to show that communism is the great evil dating back to the beginning of human history.
He does make an interesting distinction between state socialism and what i would term utopian socialism but what he designates as chiliastic socialism, a term i intend to use, this is the best thing i got out of the book.

He traces the two ideas from Plato, Cathars, Anabaptists, Incas, ancient Chinese and more. There is more about him in these chapters than there is good history on the topics.
With the overswhelming desire to show that socialism means commonality of property and often commonality of wives. He has a chapter on the end of individualization under socialism and ends with socialism as a mass death wish.
Overall the book told me more about how communism deformed people in Russia then it did about the history of socialism.
The book however does have a natural audience, either high school students trying to get a grasp on socialism as a (im)moral movement, or trying to capture that great big view of human history, that sweep of the pen that covers millenium. The details in these cases are not as important as the passion of writing, which the book has in abundance.