On Radical Change

Socialism developed in twenty first century B.C. Mesopotamia. The first written word of socialism described life in the era of the Third Dynasty of Ur. The basic premises of socialism then and now being 1 equality and the destruction of hierarchy 2 the destruction of religion 3 the destruction of family and 4 the destruction of private property. ( Solzhenitsyn, 31-38)

In 1848, Karl Marx and Friedrich Engels recounted their incendiary ideas of social reform in The Communist Manifesto. This document bashed the ruling bourgeois class. Marx furiously accused the bourgeois of oppressing the working class proletariat by forcing long working hours at low wages in sweat shops. Marx fumed that the bourgeois assumed the role of the feudal lord while the proletariat stepped into the shoes of the serf. (Marx, 79-94)

During the Industrial Revolution, capitalism boomed, touching the most remote civilizations with the “evil” trappings of free trade. With free trade emerged the factory and the earned wage concept. Marx viewed the proletariat as reduced to a simple machine toiling for the material wealth of his bourgeois employer.

Infuriated that the proletariat labored without just compensation, Marx rallied the working man of the world to unite in a bloody revolution against the greedy bourgeois lord. (Marx, 119-120)

Marx outlined his take over plan in the Manifestation in which the proletariat would overthrow the bourgeois, stripping him forever of his personal property. Marx espoused that personal property divided men from one another, that wealth in the hands of a few at the expense of the masses wreaked evil in humanity.

Similar socialist ideas may be found in the writings of Plato. In his Republic, Plato devises as elaborate plan of controlling the population through destruction of personal property. Plato illustrates a society where “people own nothing but their own bodies,” even regulating sexual intercourse through the State. Children reared by the commune would not know their parents.

The concept of marriage and family fell obsolete. Women reduced to the role of public domain were offered to the elite citizens if they possessed exceptional beauty. ( Solzhenitsyn, 38-42)

In turn art suffered to the blow of the socialist axe. Any literature, even the classics, belittling the State were burned as heresies. The concept of censorship founded the socialist movement, individual expression was squelched. As Dostoevsky writes in The Possessed, “the brainy have always seized power and been despots. Slaves must be equal, freedom and equality have never existed without despotism.” Thus the term Shigalyovism was born. Shigalyovism embodied the socialist ideal of equality. ( Solzhenitsyn, 53-56)

Destruction of individuality meant preventing the development of genius among children. The State intervened in every aspect of the citizens life from the moment of birth. All aspects of individual nature posed a threat to the socialist ideal. Destroying nonconformist behavior at its onset became a task of the socialist regime.

Herd mentality ruled socialist dogma. Individuality and any personal possessions met the torches of the Bolsheviks.

Alexander Solzhenitsyn, famous Russian dissident and author of From Under the Rubble recounts the Communist ploy to strip citizens of individuality. Family, property, and religion

Reinforce an individuals self esteem and determine him from his fellows. Choosing a mate differentiates man from the “anonymous social animal” thus characterizing his uniqueness.

Socialists view family as a threat to the survival of the State. Writers like Solzhenitsyn and Andrei Sakharov, exiled from the U.S.S.R. for their dissident views pose dangerous threats to Socialist doctrine. Such creative expression warned against by early socialists, met with expulsion to forced labor camps or death.

Soviet author Evenly Zamyatin authored the first anti-utopian novel We. Zamyatin’s revolutionary criticism of social control the masses influenced George Orwell’s 1984.

In both books, the authors depict a society in the future where the government imposes in the lives of the individual. People dress the same, think the same, talk the same dogma, etc. Suppression of the individual underlies all form of structured government. (Solzhenitsyn, 57-59)

Class control exists in the United States as well as in the U.S.S.R, however employed in a more insidious fashion. So deeply entrenched within the infrastructures of American society, the duplicitous agenda of the ruling class manages to manipulate Americans with lubricious ease. Invested in maintaining class structure at stays quo, corporate America manipulates the trends

of society by playing the middle class off against the poverty stricken. By keeping the resentment burning between middle class and poor Americans, the upper echelons avoid discerning looks into their lives. Safely tucked away from the battle ground, the rich fuel racial chaos in urban areas.

Inundating drugs into stricken urban neighborhoods conveniently diverts attention from the fact that Black people might fare better by organizing political action groups than decimating their

Communities with drug wars. The upper class depend upon racism between Black and White peoples to keep the focus at a manageable urban level. The true threat to the canonized class structure is the bonding together of the white and Black poor for social reform. The President of the United States masters sleight of hand tactics to prevent people from noticing the domestic disarray of the country.

Fostering nationalistic fervor by creating a villain in the Middle East allowed Americans to don their white hats and play hero. Unfortunately the real villain lives at home, “speaking softly and carrying a big stick.” The Welfare system plays a crucial role in the mainstay of class structure. By keeping a segment of the population dependent upon a meager allotment per month, the upper class succeeds in keeping the poor oppressed while fueling resentment from the middle class who picks up the tab.

Complete reworking of the class structure in this country would be necessary to create an equal society. Many political activists feel that this country is ripe for revolution. Black leaders regret the loss of ground made in the sixties civil rights movement. Urban rioting by Blacks in the sixties forced the government  into conceding marginal social change. The assassination of Dr. King and MalcolmX cut the momentum of the Black activist movements in the seventies and eighties.

Revolution often only brings in the redistribution of power from oppressor to the oppressed. Leaders of the revolutionary movements seem to be made of the same “despotic” fiber as the current men in power. Transfer of power from one interest group to another begets oppression, as Solzhenitsyn eloquently recounts. The challenge of restructuring society into truly equal unbiased units would require the dissolution of human nature as we know it. A higher rational logic based in a spiritual respect of human rights would have to replace greed and competition.

Given the size of the United States, its ethnic diversity, history of racism, and the competitive nature of mankind, I believe that we are not ready as a nation to risk the sacrifices involved in reordering society. As noted in the brief documentation of the nature of the socialist dogma in this paper, one may see how the ideal nature of utopia translates into the abolition of individuality. Individuality, the basis for human dignity, resides in the personal accomplishments of a person’s life.

Home, family, religion, and right to property all define the individual. People indigenous to this country, stripped of their right to practice their tribal customs fell to the blow of white supremacy.

As Igor Shafarevich writes in From Under the Rubble, “Most ethnographers think that the main reason for the disappearance of many indigenous people was not their extermination by the Europeans, not the diseases of alcoholism brought by the whites, but the destruction of their religious ideas and rituals, and of the way their life was arranged to give meaning to their existence.” ( Solzhenitsyn, 60-61)

Black Americans similarly stripped of their heritage, tribal rituals, separated from their families and forced to subsist under the WASP doctrine, suffer the result of loss of personal dignity. The decimation of the Black American family is covertly encouraged by the Welfare System. Fathers felt that their families would be better off without themes mothers with dependent children received more federal aid in the absence of their husbands.

Invisible in the media, Black people today still are projected in a negative light. Few Black role models exist in contemporary American society. People find more prosperous options selling drugs than collecting welfare checks. Eventually radical change will occur in the United States. The ongoing government backed [cultural] genocide of the Black community will force the people into the streets in search of reclaiming their individuality.

Essay written December 5, 1990, ©Macaulay Woods 2026, All rights reserved.