As readers will have noticed, someone describing himself/herself as George Dutton is now following this site closely and commenting with oh-so-clever remarks celebrating Socialism.

He quotes from a remarkable essay by Albert Einstein on Why Socialism? from 1949.

Here is Albert fretting over the survival of the human race (as well he might, given his busy contribution to atom bombs):

The abstract concept “society” means to the individual human being the sum total of his direct and indirect relations to his contemporaries and to all the people of earlier generations. The individual is able to think, feel, strive, and work by himself; but he depends so much upon society — in his physical, intellectual, and emotional existence — that it is impossible to think of him, or to understand him, outside the framework of society.

It is “society” which provides man with food, clothing, a home, the tools of work, language, the forms of thought, and most of the content of thought; his life is made possible through the labor and the accomplishments of the many millions past and present who are all hidden behind the small word “society.”

It is evident, therefore, that the dependence of the individual upon society is a fact of nature which cannot be abolished — just as in the case of ants and bees.

… the essence of the crisis of our time. It concerns the relationship of the individual to society.

The individual has become more conscious than ever of his dependence upon society. But he does not experience this dependence as a positive asset, as an organic tie, as a protective force, but rather as a threat to his natural rights, or even to his economic existence.

Moreover, his position in society is such that the egotistical drives of his make-up are constantly being accentuated, while his social drives, which are by nature weaker, progressively deteriorate … Man can find meaning in life, short and perilous as it is, only through devoting himself to society.

… 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.

… I am convinced there is only one way to eliminate these grave evils, namely through the establishment of a socialist economy, accompanied by an educational system which would be oriented toward social goals.

In such an economy, the means of production are owned by society itself and are utilized in a planned fashion. A planned economy, which adjusts production to the needs of the community, would distribute the work to be done among all those able to work and would guarantee a livelihood to every man, woman, and child.

Well, Albert. That great idea of yours worked out well wherever it was tried, nein?

And look, it’s still the way to go in that centrally planned concentration camp called North Korea, which is trying to get a few of those nukes which you so kindly helped invent.

The core philosophical point is this, one which Einstein strangely missed.

It is that centralised ‘planning’ on the scale needed to make a difference can not work, in practice or even in theory.

Because ‘planning’ on that scale necessarily diminishes the information-pool for decision-makers, hugely reduces flexibility/improvisation/creativity, and generally makes every decision more stupid. The negative results compound up.

Which was why, when I visited Moscow in mid-1986, there was almost no food being sold in a space 11 time-zones wide. And why after prices and other communist controls were lifted in 1991, food quickly started to appear in abundance for first time since the 1917 revolution.

Planning was de-centralised from the state to individuals.

The Russian case demonstrates scientifically that Einstein was not a genius but a fathead when it came to economics and ethics.

He got it 100% wrong.

The Individual does not depend on ‘society’. ‘Society’ depends on the Individual.

See also this elegant article against mechanical thinking, quoting Karl Popper brilliantly distinguishing Clocks from Clouds.

Update: a reply to George Dutton’s myriad comments:

George,

You are a one-man stream of unconsciousness. You are also quite wrong about Russia.

Read what Einstein said. The fact is that the Russians made titanic efforts for decades to do exactly what Einstein advocated, ie centrally planned production, distribution and education.  That they failed so spectacularly (and had to murder millions of people as collateral damage) DOES show once and for all that socialism of that centrally planned sort is theoretically impossible.

Your Latvian example by contrast proves nothing. The throw-away anti-Thatcher line by the author can safely be ignored, since up the road Estonia launched even more radical ‘Thatcherite’ policies in 1991 and has not had this fiasco. It should be easy for someone who knows the region in detail to show where Latvia made significant misjudgements and went so wrong.

The point is not that any market-based system guarantees sustained success. It is that basing decisions on the limited information and accompanying repression available to any ‘planned’ economy guarantees failure.

Freedom of course brings with it significant capacity to mess up. And, yes, financial interests can get so big or even corrupt that they subvert political processes and make a mess on a large scale. It’s all about balance.

But likewise government bureaucracies can get so big that they become dysfunctional and make a mess on a dramatic scale. See eg the Eurozone.

My argument is a simple philosophical one: that in the long run it is better morally and in both theory and practice to base a society primarily on honest private trading and property rights, rather than on enforced redistribution. The best examples are in fact Singapore and Cuba, which were at roughly the same wealth levels in 1960.

Freedom starts with the reality of human creativity (or not). It tends to encourage private creativity/responsibility and (by maximising information-flows) rational risk-taking.

Socialism relies upon abstract ideas of ‘society’. It necessarily diminishes information-flows. It therefore encourages apathy, private irresponsibility and irrational/ignorant decision-making.

It is just not serious to hide behind the slogan that ‘communism was never tried’. It was tried, in numerous variations just as Einstein wanted. In every case it drowned in its own blood and stupidity.

As for allowing your comments, I am a tolerant sort of fellow. But for years I have seen for myself  the damage done by communism. I don’t like to see collectivist intellectual toxic waste dumped on my own site…