Fabianism and Social Democracy

Fabianism and Social Democracy

Fabianism and social justice

Fabianism was an early form of socialism that was espoused by many 19th century intellectuals, including George Bernard Shaw and Oscar Wilde. The 19th century was an era of tremendous social injustice. Capitalism was virtually unregulated, and it was not unusual for men and women to work ten hour days or more. Child labor was widespread. It was accepted that there would be a chasm between the haves and have-nots, in terms of income, rights, and quality of life. One response to this state of injustice was Marxism or a vision of a classless society after a violent overthrow of the ruling classes. In contrast, the Fabian brand of socialism was a gradualist vision, which viewed reform from within as the best method of realizing social justice. Fabians believed that by agitating for the rights of the working classes, women, and oppressed minorities that a more representative governing structure could be created.

It is this gradual, Fabian approach that has been favored by the modern left, particularly in the wake of the human rights abuses of the Soviet Union during the 20th century. When the Fabian society first became established, women and non-property owning men did not have full emancipation. Marxists believed that no government would be able to create a democracy able to engage in meaningful power-sharing amongst different class members. Only through ownership of the means of production would there be justice. However, Fabianism noted the development of modern movements for social justice, such as women's rights, in all segments of society. There were also efforts at personal enfranchisement, as the modern labor movement began to take shape.

The Fabian view seems to effectively have 'won' because of the passage of historical, landmark acts of social justice legislation, such as laws limiting the hours workers can labor, minimum wage laws, and workers' compensation laws. In the 1930s, Marxism began to enjoy a revival of support, given that it seemed that it had been proven by an act of history that capitalism was fundamentally an untenable system in the wake of the Great Depression. But once again, gradual reforms were instituted within the United States, such as the Social Security system and public employment. After World War II, the European democracies began to lay the infrastructure of what would become modern social welfare states. The National Health System in Great Britain, which offers universal healthcare to all workers, regardless of their place of employment, as well as the elaborate pension and worker protections in France and Germany are some examples of Fabian-style reforms.

Capitalism is not necessarily viewed as an evil by Fabians. Marx famously stated that all property was theft, and viewed any kind of ownership by capitalists as morally wrong. Marx believed that working at a place owned by another was a kind of slave labor, as the capitalist profited off of owning the factory, while the workers were forced to sacrifice their bodies, sweat, and time simply for a wage. Fabianism did not attempt to do away with private property, but it did strive to contain the ability of capitalists to profit from their ownership of the means of production in an unfettered manner. The large salaries and incomes generated by capitalism it viewed as holding the potential to exercise good for all of society. Through progressive taxation, it was hoped that wealth could be equitably re-distributed to all of society, to correct the excesses of the capitalist system. The Fabians did not believe that a perfectly equal society could or should be created, but did see the imbalance of wealth generated in unregulated capitalism to be both immoral and also dangerous. It was dangerous for the health of workers, and it was also dangerous because revolt would likely come if the chasm between the haves and the have-nots grew wider and wider.

Today, a similar kind of divide exists between the privileged and the less privileged, it could be argued. In America, income disparities have been widening between the rich and poor. Thanks to Fabian ideals America does have a progressive tax system, although it is far less progressive than it used to be, and the rich often have access to ways to hide their investments and to use the tax code's deductions to pay a smaller proportion of their income than the poor. Even famously wealthy capitalists today, such as the investor Warren Buffet, have decried the current system as unfair and called for a more progressive redistribution of wealth, so the rich can pay their fair share. Ideological opponents have made not taxing the rich a kind of rallying cry against what is seen as the self-evident evil of socialism.

Socialism and Marxism, however, are not synonymous. In fact, the two groups were extremely hostile to one another during the 19th century, so examining the history of the two groups is extremely useful to contextualize current debate. Virtually no one wants a violent revolution today in the hopes of creating a new system. But the gradualist approach of allowing for a more humane type of capitalism seems to have lost support in the past thirty years, rather than gained.