Socialism, Anarchism, and Syndicalism demystified
 |
| Bertrand Russell |
In Proposed Roads to Freedom, Nobel Prize-winning philosopher, mathematician, and essayist Bertrand Russell thoroughly and thoughtfully explains the political and economic systems of three potentially viable alternatives to capitalism: Socialism, Anarchism, and Syndicalism. The book was published in 1918, when these movements were likely at their height on the world political stage and in the public’s collective consciousness. At that time, all three were ambitiously active in Europe and America, but it is hard to imagine the average reader having a minute understanding of their doctrines, which is where Russell comes in, as an eloquent interpreter of political economy for the masses. Today, in the age of Bernie Sanders and Alexandria Ocasio-Cortez, when the term Socialism inspires knee-jerk anger, Anarchism inspires fear, and Syndicalism inspires a head-scratching “Huh?”, we could use a book like this now more than ever.
Russell begins by devoting a chapter to each of the movements, defining their basic premises and providing historical background for each. He then goes into exploring specific issues of government and society by comparing and contrasting the three systems, examining such questions as how many hours workers should work and how they would be paid under each system, how would a nation operating under one of these philosophies conduct itself in international relations and war, and to what degree would art and science flourish or stagnate in a Socialist, Anarchist, or Syndicalist society. Russell states honestly that he does not think capitalism is the ideal economic system under which mankind should conduct itself, and that we should be working towards an alternative system. What’s refreshing about this book, however, is that Russell is no utopian optimist. Rather, he admits that any of the three systems in question are likely to fail in the face of mankind’s inherent greed and propensity to violence. Russell doesn’t advocate any of the three as his personal preference, but rather proposes a fourth alternative, a British form of Syndicalism known as Guild Socialism, which combines some of the better elements of all three. In the final chapter he outlines what his perfect world under Guild Socialism might look like, but again he states his case in a tone more hopeful than dogmatic.
As one would expect, Russell uses the writings of Karl Marx as the basis for his explanation of Socialism. For Anarchism, his main source is Peter Kropotkin. With Syndicalism, no one sage rises to the top, so Russell draws from a variety of texts, mostly of French origin. If Russell commits one error in his writing of this book it is that he quotes too extensively from the original doctrinal texts. I’m reading this book because I don’t want to read Marx’s Das Kapital, so I prefer it when Russell explains these ideas in his own words. Those wishing to read deeper can draw a very good bibliography from his 61 footnotes. Because the book was published a century ago, it contains a few unfortunately antiquated comments on race, such as when Russell expresses concern over “the exploitation of inferior races” where we today would use the term “developing countries.”
Russell doesn’t claim to have all the answers in Proposed Roads to Freedom, but he sure does provide the reader with an in-depth education on the subjects at hand. If more philosophers could write like Russell, using clear and accessible language without insulting the reader’s intelligence, perhaps philosophy wouldn’t be so frightening to the typical nonacademic reader (in America, at least). Russell’s body of work is a treasure trove for the rationalist and freethinking reader, and I look forward to digging deeper into his extensive catalog of writings.
If you liked this review, please follow the link below to Amazon.com and give me a “helpful” vote. Thank you.
https://www.amazon.com/review/R2AYKQDD8UWRF9/ref=cm_cr_srp_d_rdp_perm
More about Santayana’s thought than Russell’s
Having previously read a couple works by George Santayana and Bertrand Russell, I was interested in learning more about these two philosophers, so when I discovered that the former had written a book about the latter my interest was piqued. The content of The Philosophy of Bertrand Russell was first published as part of a 1913 book by Santayana entitled Winds of Doctrine: Studies in Contemporary Opinion. At some later date another publisher extracted these essays on Russell and published them as a separate book. This book should not be confused with a 1944 book of the same title edited by Paul Arthur Schlipp with contributions from various authors.
Santayana’s The Philosophy of Bertrand Russell is comprised of four chapters. The first of these chapters, “A New Scholasticism,” is little more than a brief introduction. Santayana writes from the perspective of a senior scholar commenting on an up-and-comer, even though Russell had published close to ten books by this time. Santayana encouragingly intimates that he admires what Russell has accomplished so far but disagrees with him on a number of matters. The overall tone of Santayana’s writing is one of a mentor offering his mentee a mixture of faint praise and mildly reproachful but constructive criticism.
In the second chapter, “The Study of Essence,” Santayana begins by explaining how philosophers since Plato have made a distinction between the ideal world and the world that man is capable of perceiving with his senses. Santayana describes Russell’s contribution to this continuum as a sort of oxymoronic logical idealism in which mathematics is seen as the underlying truth of the universe. The elder scholar then goes on to critique what he sees as the fallacies in this line of reasoning.
At some point prior to the writing of this book, Russell must have published some essay criticizing the philosophy of pragmatism, because chapter 3, “The Critique of Pragmatism,” reads like a response to such a statement. Santayana, who studied under William James, is closer to a pragmatist than Russell, but that doesn’t stop him from finding fault in pragmatic doctrine. In fact, this chapter is really about Santayana’s views on pragmatism and yields little insight into the philosophy of Russell, who’s name is only mentioned a few times in the entire chapter.
The final chapter, “Hypostatic Ethics,” is a more pointed critique of Russell, focusing on his conception of ethics. Santayana chides the absolutism of Russell’s ethical philosophy, seeing it as prescribing right and wrong in terms as rigid as mathematical equations. Santayana advocates a more relativistic ethics, not as relativist as the pragmatists, perhaps, but at least a happy middle ground.
If you are looking for an introductory or blanket overview of Russell’s philosophy, this is not that book. Despite what its title indicates, this book really reveals more about Santayana’s thought than Russell’s. A very brief book as far as philosophy texts go, it won’t take up too much of your time, and Santayana’s prose is more accessible and less cryptic here than in The Life of Reason, though he still has a tendency to say with a hundred words what he could have said in ten. Those interested in Russell will likely be disappointed by this book. Those interested in Santayana, however, might find it a satisfying read.
If you liked this review, please follow the link below to Amazon.com and give me a “helpful” vote. Thank you.
https://www.amazon.com/review/R1VGETA9KMT7AT/ref=cm_cr_srp_d_rdp_perm
An excellent epistemological primer
Philosophers usually direct their writings towards their fellow philosophers rather than to the general reader, thus making the pursuit of philosophy a difficult and frustrating task for anyone falling into the latter category. Most philosophical works expect the reader to know the entire history of Western thought leading up to the work in question. Every once in a while, however, some benevolent philosopher will come along and write an accessible text that serves as an inviting entryway into the discipline. Bertrand Russell’s 1912 book The Problems of Philosophy is one of the better examples of a philosophical primer. Rather than the usual chronological approach to such books, Russell proceeds thematically, addressing a series of philosophical questions, with each topic building upon the knowledge acquired in the previous chapter. Though Russell references other philosophers like Plato, Descartes, Kant, and Hegel, the reader is not required to have prior familiarity with any of their works in order to comprehend the philosophical concepts being discussed.
That’s not to say the book is an easy read. Russell doesn’t dumb down any of his ideas in order to pander to an audience of philosophical novices. He does, however, express philosophical concepts in a plain and simple vocabulary that general readers can understand. No knowledge of disciplinary jargon is required; Russell defines all the terms necessary for understanding his argument. His prose can get convoluted at times when the complex subject matter requires it, but there’s nothing that precludes a diligent reader from fully appreciating the text. Throughout the book he uses examples and analogies from everyday life that are easily comprehensible.
As a title, The Problems of Philosophy is a little misleading, or at least too broad. A more fitting title (though less inviting) would have been The Problems of Epistemology because Russell is almost exclusively concerned here with the particular branch of philosophy that deals with the theory of knowledge—how we perceive the reality around us and form beliefs as to what is true or false. This book only touches on metaphysics and doesn’t cover ethics at all. Russell does delve rather deeply into the territory of logic, which is essentially the application of mathematical principles to language or ideas in order to differentiate between truth and falsehood. He begins by questioning the difference between appearance and reality. To what extent can we be certain that the information we gather through our senses reflects the true nature of reality? From there he proceeds to discuss the existence and nature of matter. Subsequent chapters go on to explain how we acquire knowledge from sense data and inductive reasoning, how we form a priori judgements, and why we sometimes harbor erroneous beliefs. Although the book primarily advances Russell’s own ideas on these subjects, he does give due consideration to theories and philosophies that oppose his own, so the reader gets a well rounded perspective on each topic.
I’ve often wondered why Russell was awarded the Nobel Prize in Literature even though he is a mathematician, logician, and philosopher. After reading this book, one sees how the elegant quality of his prose serves to enlighten readers and expand their perspective. Russell was a master of language as well as mathematics. His concluding chapter on the value of philosophy is positively inspiring. This excellent book not only provides stimulating insight into the processes of human thought; it also opens your mind to new ways of thinking about reality.
If you liked this review, please follow the link below to Amazon.com and give me a “helpful” vote. Thank you.
https://www.amazon.com/review/R1XOCCSFNYU5U2/ref=cm_cr_rdp_perm
