I had just begun college when the Union of Soviet Socialist Republics (USSR) imploded due to the weight of its bureaucratic contradictions in December 1991. Immediately, a barrage of celebratory narratives, many of which rejoiced the end of the Cold War and socialism, assaulted us. It disturbed me. Even in school, I remember being a staunch defender of the USSR, not because I understood anything about socialism, but because it was a good way to annoy some of our anti-communist teachers. However, in 1991, one had to confront the reality of the end of an era. Almost immediately, social scientists like Francis Fukuyama spoke of having reached the “end of history” and the triumph of free-market democracies. Of course, the goings-on in the former USSR, such as Stalin’s purges, forced migration, environmental disasters and the political imprisonment of nations, added to the misery of having my nose rubbed in defeat.
In the years that followed, it was apparent that socialism and USSR had followed divergent paths. For every person who denounced socialism, there were a dozen more who pointed out that the USSR was only one, albeit important, source of inspiration for socialist experimentation for the oppressed of the world. Historians, sociologists and philosophers alluded to the fact that the Bolshevik revolution of 1917 was a significant milestone for the progress of history in the world and that it was an inspirational moment that gave hope to the downtrodden. Despite the celebratory tone of the defeat of socialism, it seemed to me that the universal ideas of freedom and dignity of working peoples, was gaining ground. Besides, the Soviet Union was not an evil dictatorship as we were exhorted to believe in our youth. It was a bold, though badly managed effort at improving the lives of millions of people. Years later, as I travelled through Central Asia’s former Soviet republics, it was easy to see the affection and nostalgia that older people had for a system (and country) in which they were educated and had dignified lives as workers and professionals.
It is almost 20 years since the death of socialism was announced and in this interim, we have seen capitalism crushing the lives of ordinary working people at regular intervals. In fact, with the debt crisis looming over the United States and countries like Greece and Ireland staring bankruptcy in the face, thanks to their governments supporting speculative finance and big business, it would seem as though capitalism continues to fail the world on a daily basis. Yet, it is not as if socialists are jumping with joy. If anything, socialists are aware that capitalism’s failures are bound to lead to more aggressive forms of state control through brute force. Already, one can see that the boastful rhetoric of advocates of liberal democracy and free market is beginning to change. They no longer talk about the attractions of the free market. Instead, they talk about the profligacy of their governments, especially while offering social security to the poor and the aged. In the US, there is an alarming rise of conservative, free-market exponents, who have resurrected the ghost of Ayn Rand and call for a new era of aggressive individualism.
I am fashionably inclined to be sceptical of totalitarian projects, including failed ones like the Bolshevik revolution. Yet, I have to admit that for all its drawbacks, the Soviet experience allowed the oppressed of the world to have some hope for redemption. As things stand in much of the developed world today, capitalism is becoming more authoritarian and tyrannical. Instead of scaling down its greed, it has discovered war as a means of disciplining obstinate dissenters. At such times, it seems imperative to nurture alternate visions of organising our lives. The old socialist principles of dignity, justice and the promise of equality seem to be an appealing place to start.
Sanjay (Xonzoi) Barbora
xonzoi.barbora@gmail.com
In the years that followed, it was apparent that socialism and USSR had followed divergent paths. For every person who denounced socialism, there were a dozen more who pointed out that the USSR was only one, albeit important, source of inspiration for socialist experimentation for the oppressed of the world. Historians, sociologists and philosophers alluded to the fact that the Bolshevik revolution of 1917 was a significant milestone for the progress of history in the world and that it was an inspirational moment that gave hope to the downtrodden. Despite the celebratory tone of the defeat of socialism, it seemed to me that the universal ideas of freedom and dignity of working peoples, was gaining ground. Besides, the Soviet Union was not an evil dictatorship as we were exhorted to believe in our youth. It was a bold, though badly managed effort at improving the lives of millions of people. Years later, as I travelled through Central Asia’s former Soviet republics, it was easy to see the affection and nostalgia that older people had for a system (and country) in which they were educated and had dignified lives as workers and professionals.
It is almost 20 years since the death of socialism was announced and in this interim, we have seen capitalism crushing the lives of ordinary working people at regular intervals. In fact, with the debt crisis looming over the United States and countries like Greece and Ireland staring bankruptcy in the face, thanks to their governments supporting speculative finance and big business, it would seem as though capitalism continues to fail the world on a daily basis. Yet, it is not as if socialists are jumping with joy. If anything, socialists are aware that capitalism’s failures are bound to lead to more aggressive forms of state control through brute force. Already, one can see that the boastful rhetoric of advocates of liberal democracy and free market is beginning to change. They no longer talk about the attractions of the free market. Instead, they talk about the profligacy of their governments, especially while offering social security to the poor and the aged. In the US, there is an alarming rise of conservative, free-market exponents, who have resurrected the ghost of Ayn Rand and call for a new era of aggressive individualism.
I am fashionably inclined to be sceptical of totalitarian projects, including failed ones like the Bolshevik revolution. Yet, I have to admit that for all its drawbacks, the Soviet experience allowed the oppressed of the world to have some hope for redemption. As things stand in much of the developed world today, capitalism is becoming more authoritarian and tyrannical. Instead of scaling down its greed, it has discovered war as a means of disciplining obstinate dissenters. At such times, it seems imperative to nurture alternate visions of organising our lives. The old socialist principles of dignity, justice and the promise of equality seem to be an appealing place to start.
Sanjay (Xonzoi) Barbora
xonzoi.barbora@gmail.com
