We probably cannot ascribe the failure of this massive seventy-year experiment in socialism exclusively to Stalinism and the lack of democracy. What has happened appears to refute the utopian notion that masses of people in the industrial age can work creatively over long periods of time for a loftier purpose than self-interest.
Even after 300,000 years, it's still difficult to generalize about human nature. Evidently we must reject the idea that socially undesirable tendencies like egoism, greed for private property, exploitation, aggression, racial hatred, and nationalism can be attributed to the relations of production under capitalism and can therefore be eliminated by changing those relations. Such "flaws" are clearly as human as the sense of justice, the notion of solidarity, and the willingness to help others--though both "good" and "bad" qualities may be weakened or strengthened through socialization. Only a dictatorship could "prove" the thesis that socially undesirable qualities are not part of human nature, but the result of sabotage and infiltration by enemies and traitors.
The doctrine of socialism is not scientific but utopian. "Scientific socialism" distinguishes itself from other doctrines of salvation by claiming to describe objective laws of history. It asserts that "scientific insight" alone--not faith--is needed to enter into the earthly paradise of communism. Yet it requires terror and dictatorship to support its so-called laws of history, to show how humankind has inexorably moved toward a socialist utopia.
The socialist utopia is, without a doubt, a product of the contradictions of capitalism. The outrages of capitalism have not been resolved since Marx and Engels; in fact, they have worsened dramatically and on a global scale. Little is likely to remain of the "scientific" system called socialism, but of the anger and the criticism, the social and humanistic ideals that inspired Marx's revolutionary teachings, almost all.
I don't agree with this out of principle, and I also don't see him offering him any evidence for this. You could equally well ascribe the failure to unchecked, brutal totalitarianism, which is what I would personally believe.
Sure, this is true to some degree--it's not that capitalism itself has created these vices out of thin air. The more nuanced truth that I think he's missing is that while no social system can completely suppress or manufacture human nature, there are still social systems that are better than others. Specifically, capitalism is one that enhances and supports certain negative traits like greed and exploitation, while suppressing solidarity and (often) justice. A different social system--one not founded on the premise of controlling other human beings through the endless accumulation of capital--might still be imperfect, but it would still be better. This relates to my ideas on systems.
Yeah I agree with this. Scientific insight has really nothing to do with it imo.
It's true that the idea of socialism was born from of the idea of capitalism. I'm not sure what the rest of his point is here, though.