State socialism was traditionally advocated as a means for achieving
public ownership of the means of production through the
nationalization of industry. This was intended to be a transitional phase in building a socialist economy. The goals of nationalization were to dispossess large capitalists and consolidate industry so that profit would go toward
public finance rather than private fortune. Nationalization would be the first step in a long-term process of socializing production, introducing employee management and reorganizing production to
directly produce for use rather than profit. The British
Fabian Society included proponents of state socialism, such as
Sidney Webb.
George Bernard Shaw referred to Fabians as "all Social Democrats, with a common confiction of the necessity of vesting the organization of industry and the material of production in a State identified with the whole people by complete Democracy". Nonetheless, Shaw also published the
Report on Fabian Policy (1896), declaring: "The Fabian Society does not suggest that the State should monopolize industry as against private enterprise or individual initiative".
Robert Blatchford, a member of the Fabian Society and the
Independent Labour Party, wrote the work
Merrie England (1894) that endorsed
municipal socialism. In
Merrie England, Blatchford distinguished two types of socialism, namely ideal socialism and practical socialism. Blatchford's practical socialism was a state socialism that identified existing state enterprises such as the Post Office run by the municipalities as a demonstration of practical socialism in action while claiming that practical socialism should involve the extension of
state enterprise to the
means of production as the common property of the people. Although endorsing state socialism, Blatchford's
Merrie England and his other writings were nonetheless influenced by
anarcho-communist William Morris—as Blatchford himself attested to—and Morris' anarcho-communist themes are present in
Merrie England.
Democratic socialists argue for a gradual, peaceful transition from capitalism to socialism. They wish to neutralize or abolish capitalism through political reform rather than
revolution. This method of gradualism implies the utilization of the existing state apparatus and machinery of government to move society toward socialism. Other socialists sometimes deride it as a form of
socialism from above or political elitism for relying on electoral means to achieve socialism. In contrast,
Marxism and
revolutionary socialism holds that a
proletarian revolution is the only practical way to implement fundamental changes in the structure of society. Socialists who advocate
representative democracy believe that after a certain period under socialism, the state will "
wither away" because class distinctions cease to exist. Representative democracy will be replaced by
direct democracy in the remaining public associations comprising the former state. Political power would be decentralized and distributed evenly among the population, producing a
communist society. According to Lesigne, there are two socialisms: "One is dictatorial, the other libertarian". Tucker's two socialisms were state socialism which he associated with the Marxist school, and the
libertarian socialism he advocated. Tucker noted that "the fact that State Socialism has overshadowed other forms of Socialism gives it no right to a monopoly of the Socialistic idea". According to Tucker, those two schools of socialism had in common the
labour theory of value and the ends by which
anarchism pursued different means.
In socialist states The economic model adopted in the former
Soviet Union,
Eastern Bloc, and other socialist states is often described as a form of state socialism. The ideological basis for this system was the
Stalinist theory of
socialism in one country. The system that emerged in the 1930s in the Soviet Union was based on state ownership of the means of production and centralized planning, along with bureaucratic workplace management by state officials that were ultimately subordinate to the all-encompassing
communist party. Rather than the producers controlling and managing production, the party controlled the government machinery, which directed the national economy on behalf of the communist party, and planned the production and distribution of capital goods. Because of this development,
classical and
orthodox Marxists and
Trotskyist groups denounced the communist states as
Stalinist and their economies as
state capitalist or representing
deformed or
degenerated workers' states, respectively. Within the socialist movement, there is criticism towards the use of the term socialist states in relation to countries such as
China and previously of the Soviet Union and Eastern and Central European states before what some term the "
collapse of Stalinism" in 1989. Trotskyism argues that the leadership of the communist states was corrupt and that it abandoned Marxism in all but name. In particular, some Trotskyist schools call those countries degenerated workers' states to contrast them with proper socialism (i.e. workers' states), while other Marxists and some Trotskyist schools call them state capitalist to emphasize the lack of genuine socialism and the presence of defining capitalist characteristics (wage labour, commodity production and bureaucratic control over workers).
In Germany Otto von Bismarck implemented social programs between 1883 and 1889 following his
anti-socialist laws, partly as remedial measures to appease the working class and detract support for the
Social Democratic Party of Germany (SPD). Bismarck's biographer
A. J. P. Taylor wrote: "It would be unfair to say that Bismarck took up social welfare solely to weaken the Social Democrats; he had had it in mind for a long time, and believed in it deeply. But as usual he acted on his beliefs at the exact moment when they served a practical need". When a reference was made to his friendship with
Ferdinand Lassalle (a nationalist and state-oriented socialist), Bismarck said that he was a more practical socialist than the Social Democrats. These policies were informally referred to as State Socialism by liberal and conservative opponents, and supporters of the programs later adopted the term in a further attempt to detract the working class from the SPD, to make the working class content with a nationalist-oriented capitalist
welfare state. Bismarck made the following statement as a justification for his social welfare programs: "Whoever has pensions for his old age is far more easier to handle than one who has no such prospect. Look at the difference between a private servant in the chancellery or at court; the latter will put up with much more, because he has a pension to look forward to". This did not prevent the Social Democrats from becoming the biggest party in parliament by 1912. According to historian
Jonathan Steinberg, "[a]ll told, Bismarck's system was a massive success—except in one respect. His goal to keep the Social Democratic Party out of power utterly failed. The vote for the Social Democratic Party went up and by 1912 they were the biggest party in the Reichstag". == Analysis and reception ==