Curious piece by Kevin Kelly in this month's wired about the re-emergence of socialism as a political and business idea (in the US and elsewhere in the developed world)
"[we] may not be politically immune to the rising tide of sharing, cooperation, collaboration, and collectivism. For the first time in years, the s-word is being uttered by TV pundits and in national newsmagazines as a force in US politics. Obviously, the trend toward nationalizing hunks of industry, instituting national health care, and jump-starting job creation with tax money isn't wholly due to techno-socialism. But the last election demonstrated the power of a decentralized, webified base with digital collaboration at its core. The more we benefit from such collaboration, the more open we become to socialist institutions in government. The coercive, soul-smashing system of North Korea is dead; the future is a hybrid that takes cues from both Wikipedia and the moderate socialism of Sweden"
The last time I mentioned the S-idea here, I got a few hostile comments; KK seems to preempt this in his longhand version, wisely. But I'm not sure his comment box will escape - there are loads of angry anti-socialists here in Internetland e.g. here.
What strikes those of us like me who grew up outside the US is - the "s-word" aside - how natural these ideas of collaboration, mutuality and connectedness seem to be: how human "us" is in the light of our modern scientific understanding of homo sapiens and human nature and how commonplace they are in our webworld stuff; and yet, at the same time, how provocative they are to many other folk (this despite the long history of collective ownership of infrastructure in US agriculture and the sterling work done by US-based or funded scientists in the behavioural and cognitive sciences to populate and evidence e.g. the social brain idea).
It's not just simple errors like the conflation of State Communism with the s-word that irks me here; nor the poor grasp of historical fact that e.g. old ideas of central planning were an essential part of 's-ism' (curiously central planning seems to have been imported by Lenin and his gang to the USSR from Fordist USA); no, the S-word seems to reach deep into the heart of the story many of us tell themselves about what it is to be American or modern or just "one of us"; into what Durckheim might have called the "cultural ideology" of the developed world (those ideas about the world that have become so central to how we see things that they have become part of the world as we see it).
What KK's piece usefully does is show how the idea of 'us' rather then 'I' is being reinvigorated by the technology so central to our modern world: it's revealing homo sapiens as a "we-" rather than a "me-"species. A collaborative and "necessarily interdependent creature" as Gandhi put it.
And at the same time the tensions this causes with some of our other ideas. Whatever you call it.
UPDATE: and interesting to see how much of this is part of the world-view of the man who wants to be the UK's next leader