14.3 The Utopian Socialists

In Britain, France, and the industrial areas of Germany some intellectuals, reacting to the inequities of industrial capitalism, were attracted to what came to be called socialism. Socialists generally believed that the wealth produced through human labor belonged to those who produced it and that it should be used for the benefit of all. Advocating economic and social justice, they disliked competition and favored cooperation, association, and organization. They rejected laissez-faire and called for alternatives to bourgeois-owned industrial capitalism. By definition, socialism is a theory or system of social organization wherein the ownership of the means of production, distribution, capital, and land is held by the community as a whole for the welfare of all.

The earliest socialists - Saint-Simon, Fourier, Owen, Blanc, Tristan, and Proudhon – were idealists whose visions ranged from the eccentric to the practical. Collectively they are known as “utopian socialists,” so-called so as not to confuse them with the “scientific socialism” of Karl Marx, the “founder” of communism. Here, the utopian socialists are briefly identified.

Saint-Simon (1760 - 1825)

The French nobleman, Count Henry of Saint-Simon (1760 – 1825) took the idealistic position that by humanitarian vision the world could be changed for the better. Seen as somewhat eccentric, Saint-Simon had fought in the American Revolution and, rare among nobility, supported the French Revolution. In his writings Saint-Simon called for a new society in which the supreme political power should be held by the great leaders of industry, science, and art. They, however, needed to become more humanitarian and responsible to the plight of others. Saint-Simon believed the Christian ethic, above all the “Golden Rule,” would propel humanity to its utopian future. Reform should come peacefully through “persuasion and demonstration” wherein “the idle” (the owners of the means of production) would be convinced to seek to improve the quality of life of “the busy,” the workers (Brinton et al, 206). The result would be a universal prosperity to which all would contribute and from which all would benefit. He envisioned a future federation of European states (beginning with the union of the most advanced: Britain, France) and, ultimately, a European parliament.

Saint-Simon never offered specific means whereby such visions might be made reality. His contribution to socialism was purely intellectual, and his reputation as a prophet of change would be diminished by the eccentricity of his followers. The “Saint-Simeons” identified themselves by long beards and waistcoats that fastened in back, symbolizing humanity’s mutual dependence. They also believed that a future female Messiah would be found somewhere along the Nile. Oddly, one of them, Ferdinand de Lesseps, would be the engineer who would later supervise the building of the Suez Canal!

Charles Fourier (1772 - 1837)

Born into poverty, Robert Owen was a self-made man who advanced from an apprentice to a draper to the ownership of textile mills by the age of thirty. In the 1790s Owen purchased a cotton textile mill in New Lanarck in Scotland and was disturbed by the conditions under which his employees – adult and child – worked. Through a policy of paternalism, he resolved both to improve the quality of his workers’ lives and increase profits. To this end he would make New Lanarck a model industrial community. For adults he provided better working conditions, a ten-hour work day, higher wages, and cleaner and roomier housing in New Lanarck’s company housing. For children he raised the minimum age for employment to ten years and provided time for real schooling. Rejecting traditional learning, Owen’s educational policy was Rousseauian in that, like Rousseau’s fictional Émile, children would learn crafts, nature study, and other “practical” subjects.[1] Ever the optimist, Owen believed that educated people would be able to achieve greater productivity and the gloomy predictions of the “dismal scientists” (Malthus in particular) would be proved untrue (Brinton et al, 208).

Owen, like Fourier, believed that society would benefit from an overall restructuring along utopian lines. To this end he proposed development of a planned community called a Village of Cooperation. It would consist of geometrically arranged buildings called a “parallelogram.” Peopled by volunteers and small in size, the parallelogram would engage in both industry and agriculture. Finding Britain unreceptive to the idea of Villages of Cooperation, Owen looked across the Atlantic.

In the 1820s Owen traveled to the United States. In 1826 he financed the creation of a parallelogram community in Indiana called New Harmony. Lacking effective planning and falling victim to unscrupulous speculators, New Harmony failed within two years. Disappointed, he returned to Britain and directed his energies to labor organization.

The early 1830s found British workers forming “combinations” (trade unions) to seek improved working conditions. Seeing that individual labor associations commanded little respect and had even less influence on the owners and managers of industry, Owen called for the federation of associations in one giant organization. The Grand Union, as it came to be known, had only fleeting success.

Louis Blanc (1811 - 1882)

In his “The Organization of Labor” (1839), the French journalist Louis Blanc wrote “What proletarians need is the instruments of labor; it is the function of government to supply these. If we were to define our conception of the state, our answer would be, that the state is the banker of the poor” (Brinton et al., 210). In other words, government must guarantee workers the right to work and to a decent wage, especially during times of economic depression. This should be done, he argued, through a system of “social workshops” subsidized by the government. The workshops, made up of workers from the same trade, would be cooperatives, producing and selling their goods directly to consumers. The workers would then share the proceeds. As the workshops became financially successful, government financial support would be withdrawn. Blanc believed that the workshop idea would become the model for the total restructuring of all areas of the French economy. Capitalism would be replaced by cooperatives wherein workers would be productive and prosperous. All would be elevated to the same level of wealth and France would become a classless society. It was an idealistic notion at best, but Blanc’s socialism differed from that of the other “utopians” in that it was founded on political action, not philanthropy.

In 1848 France would experience another wave of revolutionary unrest, and the Bourbon-Orléanist monarchy would be replaced by a republican Provisional Government. Among the leaders of this new government was Louis Blanc. On the background of the Revolution of 1848, Blanc would oversee the creation of a “national workshop” program. Contrary to Blanc’s vision that the workshops would become a socialist alternative to capitalism, they instead became welfare agencies providing temporary work (at great public expense) for the Parisian unemployed. In the continuing turmoil of the revolution, the workshops would become increasingly radical and threatening to conservatives seeking a “law and order” solution to France’s problems. In the bloody “June Days” radical opposition to the new government would be brutally suppressed and the workshop program would be abolished. Blanc fled to Britain.

Flora Tristan (1803 - 1844)

At the same time Louis Blanc was formulating his workshop concept, a remarkable French woman was also active as a socialist. Flora Tristan was the daughter of a French mother and Peruvian father. When her father died the French government confiscated his fortune, denying her inheritance. The government ruled that since her parents were married in Spain, their marriage was not legal in France and therefore she was illegitimate and not entitled to the inheritance. She took a number of makeshift jobs and later married. Her husband proved abusive of both her and her children. On their divorce, the court awarded custody of her children to her former husband. Angered, she took up the cause of women’s rights and, through her writings and speeches, became a forceful voice for female emancipation (Merriman 711). As female laborers received only half the wages of men who did the same jobs, she argued that until women were treated equally, the working class would never receive a rightful share of the wealth that it produced.

In her 1844 publication The Workers’ Union Tristan called for all of labor to unite in one massive union. Once formed, this union should become politically active and seek expansion of the franchise, the right of all persons – male and female – to work and to receive equal pay for equal labor. She called the formation of state-financed union centers throughout France where workers’ children would receive education and where disabled and retired workers could receive medical care (Sherman 125). In short, Tristan (as was Blanc) was less “utopian” and more practical in her approach to the injustices of a capitalist society.

Pierre-Joseph Proudhon (1809 - 1865)