Socialism the third most searched for term in 2008

US: Interest in socialism surging

Merriam-Webster reports that socialism was the third most searched-for term (“bailout” was #1) during 2008 in their online dictionary, which receives 125 million views per month, meaning millions of people were looking to find out what socialism means.

Sales of The Communist Manifesto have skyrocketed, with Amazon.com reporting a 700% increase since the banking collapse, according to the Times (UK) (11/9/08).

In Berlin, all copies of Karl Marx’s Capital reportedly sold out several months ago. According to Joern Schuetrumpf, the German publisher of Marx’s Collected Works, "Until 2004, we sold less than 100 copies of Das Kapital per year. In the ten months of 2008, we have sold more than 2,500 copies. It is clear that people are interested in learning what Marx has to say about why capitalism does not work.” (Inter Press Service, 11/7/08)

There’s even now a Japanese comic book version of Das Kapital, which sold 6,000 copies within a few days of hitting the shelves in December. Additionally, Kanikosen (“The Crab Factory Ship”), a Communist novel from 1929 about a group of workers rebelling against brutal working conditions on their ship, has experienced a resurgence, with sales of over 500,000 copies in 2008, up from an average of around 5,000 in previous years (Telegraph (UK), 11/18/08).

The fall of capitalism is nigh...and stuff.

I would like to point out that this is probably less because more people are turning to socialism, and more because of last year's election and the throwing around of the term "socialism" in relation to Monseur Obama.

*Monsieur

Also, nice job pointing out the obvious, but the implication that sales skyrocketed after the economic crisis only serve to illustrate that socialism is being sought after as an alternative to capitalism, not because Mccain and company used socialism as a dirty word.

Now whether people are beginning to understand the role socialism would have in this context is another story, but I still find it pleasant that many are actually seeking new methods of progress, because with capitalism there are no avenues left.

There is no evidence to suggest that support for socialism has increased, only interest. It is easy to be interested in something you do not agree with.

You'd think is more people were looking up socialism (and thus knew what it meant), then they would stop calling Obama one.

You'd think that. But then again, I remember the time Sugarpoultry looked up "Fiscal Conservatism", quoted its precise definition, and still failed to grasp the fact that McCain wasn't going to support social programs for war veterans. Looking it up doesn't mean you understand the situation, or even that you understand the word you just looked up - it just means you typed the word into a search engine.

So basically they looked up the term "socialist" because they saw the McCain camp using it, may not have bothered comparing that definition to Obama's actual manifesto, and simply taking it at face value that he supports "state or collective ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods".

Saying that people are supporting socialism just because they're looking it up is like saying that those who look up Nazism support it. Saying that those who buy The Communist Manifesto support communism is kind of like saying that all the people who bought Nineteen Eighty-Four support collective oligarchism or Ingsoc (kind of, because Nineteen Eighty-Four is intended as a sattire even though it's almost written in the Party's favour), or that anyone who has read Mein Kampf supports Hitler's views, even though nowadays anyone who reads it only does so for the purposes of history lessons (I had to read a few passages from it for an essay in my A-Levels).

Searching for knowledge does not mean you support whatever you might find out.

Actually, there was a spate of recent articles from east germany and other soviet bloc indicating that those who actually lived under those regimes on average preferred them to capitalism.

And if you look at the numbers, socialism has actually been gaining in favor on a worldwide scale in a degree which we have not seen since the first half of the twentieth century. While I loathe and detest social democrats, the fact that they have been so successful in various european countries clearly shows that many do harbor socialist inclinations.

Who cares if it sprung up from mccain's smear campaign? It's arousing interest and that's what matters.

Capital is a long, difficult book. Increased sales do not necessarily mean increased readership to the extent of those sales. I don't know if I would be able to read and understand the entire work on my own.

And, of course, everyone's right when they say that an increase of interest does not necessarily mean an interest in support. Marx read Adam Smith very closely, with sustained interest. That doesn't mean Marx was a liberal capitalist.

Originally Posted by Discussion

Actually, there was a spate of recent articles from east germany and other soviet bloc indicating that those who actually lived under those regimes on average preferred them to capitalism.

That's because East Germany got neglected after the wall came down. That part of the country didn't do particularly well. This isn't because capitalism itself failed them, but rather that the attempt to bring capitalism to a country that had been run by socialists for so long didn't work quite as well as they'd hoped. The foundations of post-war East Germany were built on socialism, so trying to change the overall structure without tearing it up from the foundations is naturally not going to work that well.

And if you look at the numbers, socialism has actually been gaining in favor on a worldwide scale in a degree which we have not seen since the first half of the twentieth century. While I loathe and detest social democrats, the fact that they have been so successful in various european countries clearly shows that many do harbor socialist inclinations.

Nikolas Sarkozy is not a socialist. Angela Merkel is not a socialist. Silvio Berlusconi is not a socialist. Gordon Brown may be slightly more left than Tony Blair but New Labour is nowhere near as left as Old Labour, but rather somewhere near the centre of the political spectrum (centre-left or centre-right, if either, is up for debate, but centre-something is undisputed), and any recent "socialist" actions 0n his part are only in direct response to economic crises. Etc, etc.

Europe is only socialist in comparison to America's political scale, but America's scale is aligned so far to the right that one wonders how there even is a "right" in America anymore. If Europeans are socialist, so is Barack Obama, and Barack Obama is anything but. He is a moderate conservative - he is centre-right. He is not even remotely left.

Who cares if it sprung up from mccain's smear campaign? It's arousing interest and that's what matters.

This does not mean that socialism is being supported, again. Simply looked up.

Originally Posted by Discussion

Actually, there was a spate of recent articles from east germany and other soviet bloc indicating that those who actually lived under those regimes on average preferred them to capitalism.

Just out of curiosity, if these people live under communist or socialist systems, how do they know they prefer them to capitalism? It would be like someone who lives in the United States saying they liked living under socialism better ... well, where's their credibility? If they simply visited another country, a socialist one for the sake of convenience, that would last between two days to a month or two. That wouldn't be time to experience their health care system, it probably wouldn't bring them to abject poverty to experience what it's like at that level, and so on and so forth.

My family went through poverty here in the United States, where my parents literally had zero income for over a year. Despite that, we were able to keep our house, a car and a truck, and keep food on the table. I'm not saying this would be impossible under socialism, because I don't know that, but how would someone who had spent a few weeks in the United States even have time to experience that kind of thing? Likewise, to people who visit a socialist nation and claim to have "experienced it" of course, but the point stands. It's a rather baseless, and therefore pointless, comparison, don't you think?

Originally Posted by Silver

Just out of curiosity, if these people live under communist or socialist systems, how do they know they prefer them to capitalism?

I will direct you to the terms "recent", "East Germany", and "Soviet Bloc".

Look, lets get a few things strait. Simply because something is widely searched for does not mean it is supported. If a school teacher told her students to look up the word "Discrimination", then it would be considered a widely looked up word (for that class at least). Does that mean that the students in that class support dicrimination? Hell no. Likewise, simply having Marx's book being widely read does not mean it is supported. Is everyone who reads the works of Robert Graham an anarchist? Does reading 1984 mean you support totalitarianism?

Originally Posted by The Arbitrator

This does not mean that socialism is being supported, again. Simply looked up.

Yeah, but given the results of the election, it could mean that people liked what they read about it. Or it could mean that people thought McCain was as just being full 0f...senility.

Originally Posted by Red Dingo

Yeah, but given the results of the election, it could mean that people liked what they read about it. Or it could mean that people thought McCain was as just being full 0f...senility.

Obama never said he supported socialist policies. So why would these people support socialist policies?

Like others have indicated, it was probably the result of people on the right unjustifiably accusing Obama of having socialist tendencies. I guarantee that the majority of those who looked it up did so out of ignorance, educated themselves, said "Oh," and moved on. Probably haven't thought about it since.

Originally Posted by Slime

Like others have indicated, it was probably the result of people on the right unjustifiably accusing Obama of having socialist tendencies. I guarantee that the majority of those who looked it up did so out of ignorance, educated themselves, said "Oh," and moved on. Probably haven't thought about it since.

This is why sales of the Communist Manifesto have multiplied by 7 over the last year, and Das Kapital by 25?

The online dictionary search count can obviously be attributed to the election banter, however, the increased book sales during the time of a global recession paint a different picture, especially when both of these books can be found online for free, legally. (and in many a library, no doubt.)

I don't see a world-wide revolution occurring any time soon, (thought it would be nice) however, I'm sure this will result in an increased number of Socialists and Communists, and a much more educated Capitalist population.

There’s even now a Japanese comic book version of Das Kapital, which sold 6,000 copies within a few days of hitting the shelves in December.

I've been pretty excited about this manga for a while. I can't wait for a translation.

Originally Posted by SheikahSage

Likewise, simply having Marx's book being widely read does not mean it is supported. Is everyone who reads the works of Robert Graham an anarchist?

I would say that the portion of the population who has read the works of Graham probably has a higher percentage of anarchists than the general population.

Does reading 1984 mean you support totalitarianism?

The message of 1984 is anti-totalitarianism, anti-fascism, pro-socialism, and pro-liberty. It's also a work of fiction, not a manifestation of an ideology.

Originally Posted by 8bit

This is why sales of the Communist Manifesto have multiplied by 7 over the last year, and Das Kapital by 25?

The online dictionary search count can obviously be attributed to the election banter, however, the increased book sales during the time of a global recession paint a different picture, especially when both of these books can be found online for free, legally. (and in many a library, no doubt.)

I don't see a world-wide revolution occurring any time soon, (thought it would be nice) however, I'm sure this will result in an increased number of Socialists and Communists, and a much more educated Capitalist population.

Certainly but I doubt it's all down to support, and I doubt support has increased so drastically. They did say "during ten months of 2008", and the recession only came along in like, October. We don't know where the highest numbers were sold, we can only presume that they were during the early recession period, not know. Unless you can pull up some figures.

I've been pretty excited about this manga for a while. I can't wait for a translation.

So is Das Kapital a work of fiction? That's the only way I can see it working as a manga.

I would say that the portion of the population who has read the works of Graham probably has a higher percentage of anarchists than the general population.

That doesn't mean everyone who's read it supports anarchy, much like those historians who have read Mein Kampf probably don't support Nazism in this day and age.

The message of 1984 is anti-totalitarianism, anti-fascism, pro-socialism, and pro-liberty. It's also a work of fiction, not a manifestation of an ideology.

Firstly it wasn't "pro-socialism", and I can see no way of reading it like that. If anything it was anti-socialism, as Orwell criticized both communist and Nazi regimes, and gave no indication that he thought that communism could be done right, gave no indication whatsoever that he thought Stalin was doing communism wrong. The Party controlled everything, which to some degree incorporates socialist thinking - "state or collective ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods". As he made this a facet of the Party's rule, and the Party was basically his strawman political, there could be nothing good about what they do in his mind. He demonstrated that this was part of the slippery slope to a totalitarian government, and if you don't agree on that point, then you can at least clearly agree that at no point was there any support for a socialist system. It was pro-liberty and pro-individualist-thinking, anti-communist and anti-fascist, that's all.

Secondly it is a manifestation of an ideology of sorts, the ideology of totalitarianism, which everyone sees as bad, and which is therefore why the book will obviously be read in a negative mindset (by myself also, for clarification's sake). It is a manifestation of an ideology even though he's only manifesting it for the purpose of criticising it. Further, as I also pointed out, "Nineteen Eighty-Four is intended as a sattire even though it's almost written in the Party's favour", so you could read it thinking that it's actually bigging up the Party. Unlikely, but possible. More likely is reading Brave New World and thinking that a Eutopia, or reading the Judge Dredd comics and supporting their little Kritocracy/Kritarchy. Just because a book of dystopian themes has an anti-something slant doesn't mean that the person reading will have that same slant. One could read Jennifer Government and still be a devout capitalist, simply waving off the book's criticisms as fictional nonsense.

Surely, you agree that an interest, however increased, is not explained by support. You could read a variety of books by a multitude of theorists and philosophers and not support a single one of them. I'm going to have to read a whole bunch of works by legal philosophers for my course by the end of this year, possibly purchasing many of them, and I can't say (having looked at a brief summary of what some of them believe) that I agree with any but one of them (who promptly changed his views after he received criticism, to my annoyance as his earlier views were far more valid).

After 9/11 the sell of flight tickets went down.
After the Madrid/London bombings less people took public transport.

It's a counteractive effect, when one thing goes wrong people get interested in the opposite, it will balance out again after the crisis is over.

Who cares. The era of socialist revolution was eighty years ago.

Originally Posted by The Arbitrator

So is Das Kapital a work of fiction? That's the only way I can see it working as a manga.

Is that an attack on Das Kapital, or are you not familiar with the work? Graphic novels have been writen on nonfiction many, many times in the past. It's not uncommon.

That doesn't mean everyone who's read it supports anarchy, much like those historians who have read Mein Kampf probably don't support Nazism in this day and age.

And I didn't state that anyone who reads a Socialist or Marxist piece of literature is a Socialist or Marxist, however, percentages of Socialists and Marxists are probably higher among those who have read Socialist and Marxist literature.

Firstly it wasn't "pro-socialism", and I can see no way of reading it like that. If anything it was anti-socialism, as Orwell criticized both communist and Nazi regimes, and gave no indication that he thought that communism could be done right, gave no indication whatsoever that he thought Stalin was doing communism wrong. The Party controlled everything, which to some degree incorporates socialist thinking - "state or collective ownership and administration of the means of production and distribution of goods". As he made this a facet of the Party's rule, and the Party was basically his strawman political, there could be nothing good about what they do in his mind.

I don't really see Orwell writing anti-socialist literature, as he fought in the Spanish Civil-War with the Workers' Party of Marxist Unification, but I digress, 1984 (and Animal Farm, for that matter, however, that's far, far more obviously a criticism of Stalin specifically) was a criticism of Stalinist States, and centralized Nationalist Capitalism, (Nationalist Socialism) however, it also criticized the hierarchy not only present in Stalinism, but also in every State in existence today.

He demonstrated that this was part of the slippery slope to a totalitarian government, and if you don't agree on that point, then you can at least clearly agree that at no point was there any support for a socialist system. It was pro-liberty and pro-individualist-thinking, anti-communist and anti-fascist, that's all.

The pro-socialist writing in 1984 is far more subtle than its anti-hierarchy themes, however it's definitely there. The writings of Goldstein in 1984 mirror the writings of Trotsky's essays, for example. (and really, one of the major undercurrents of the novel is the conflict between Trotsky and Stalin.)

Secondly it is a manifestation of an ideology of sorts, the ideology of totalitarianism, which everyone sees as bad, and which is therefore why the book will obviously be read in a negative mindset (by myself also, for clarification's sake). It is a manifestation of an ideology even though he's only manifesting it for the purpose of criticising it. Further, as I also pointed out, "Nineteen Eighty-Four is intended as a sattire even though it's almost written in the Party's favour", so you could read it thinking that it's actually bigging up the Party. Unlikely, but possible. More likely is reading Brave New World and thinking that a Eutopia, or reading the Judge Dredd comics and supporting their little Kritocracy/Kritarchy.

Or watching Star Wars and deciding that 'that Darth Sidious is a pretty cool guy'.

Just because a book of dystopian themes has an anti-something slant doesn't mean that the person reading will have that same slant. One could read Jennifer Government and still be a devout capitalist, simply waving off the book's criticisms as fictional nonsense.

That's like arguing that just because Survivor has a large viewership doesn't mean that a lot of people like Survivor. One could simply watch Survivor to know what it's about.

I hate the show myself, and I've seen a few episodes. Would I watch every season in their entirety to better understand the series? No. Would most people who dislike the series do this? Probably not.

Sure, a Capitalist may look up Socialism on a free web-dictionary to better understand what it's all about, but are they likely to purchase two pieces of Socialist/Communist literature? Is it possible? Of course. Will most Capitalists read The Communist Manifesto and Das Kapital? I doubt it.

Surely, you agree that an interest, however increased, is not explained by support. You could read a variety of books by a multitude of theorists and philosophers and not support a single one of them. I'm going to have to read a whole bunch of works by legal philosophers for my course by the end of this year, possibly purchasing many of them, and I can't say (having looked at a brief summary of what some of them believe) that I agree with any but one of them (who promptly changed his views after he received criticism, to my annoyance as his earlier views were far more valid).

Do you think majors in Marxist theory have increased by 700% this year? If they had, wouldn't that also create reason to believe an increase in support of Marxism?