Stone Soup Magazine for young readers, writers, and artists

Socialism Reexplained: Age of Reason to Cold War

Anirudh Parthasarathy, 13 (San Jose, CA) Socialism Reexplained: Age of Reason to Cold War Anirudh Parthasarathy, 13 History of Socialism In order to understand socialism as a whole, we have to understand how nineteenth century capitalism worked, the critiques of uncontrolled capitalism, and the reasoning behind the call for a more equitable economic system that eventually led to the birth of both socialism and communism. In the eighteenth and nineteenth centuries, feudalism and absolute monarchism were abolished with people wanting more liberty, self-determination, democracy, and individualism. These ideals started becoming popular during the Enlightenment of the seventeenth and eighteenth centuries, which in turn led to the Age of Reason, French Absolutism, and English Constitutionalism. In England, eventually, people were tired of being subjugated by an authoritarian government. Whether the oppressors were a monarch, members of an aristocracy, or even the parliament and government officials, the British people wanted true liberty, eventually leading to a revolution that destroyed the feudal system. England became the first democratic/republican and capitalist country the world had seen since antiquity. Many people probably hoped this new system of governance would be better than the anti-humanistic authoritarian feudal system. They were wrong. England practiced a form of uncontrolled libertarian capitalism in which there was no government intervention. Because of this, nineteenth century England had a small, extremely wealthy capitalist class who owned all the organizations and economic resources—such as land and capital—while the majority were an extremely poor working class who worked very low-paying jobs with terrible conditions. The workers often worked in monotonous jobs for long hours and with wages so low they lived in extreme poverty, while the capitalist class got all the profits and luxury derived from the hard work of the workers! First Socialists This extreme inequality frustrated many people including many intellectuals/philosophers, who became the first socialists. Some of the very first socialists were known as utopian socialists. Such socialists advocated for things like collective ownership of the means of production and enterprises, government intervention (or sometimes even central planning of the economy and of production), solidarity among the working class, a more equitable distribution of wealth, and general empowerment of workers. Another group called the chartists advocated for universal male suffrage (not nearly as impressive as universal suffrage in which females also have a vote). Utopian socialism started with Henri de Saint Simon and then continued with Charles Fourier, Pierre Joseph Proudhon (one of the first anarchists and one who declared “property is theft”), Pierre Leroux, and Robert Owen. Another more far-left brand of socialism called revolutionary socialism believed that rather than creating a socialist system through the cooperation of the workforce, government, and the wealthy, it was up to the workers to launch a revolution in order to completely overthrow the capitalist government and replace it with a socialist system. Communism is a type of revolutionary socialism, but communism and revolutionary socialism aren’t the same because there are other types of revolutionary socialism, some of which have anarchist ideals. A prominent socialist community was the Paris Commune created in 1871. The Paris Commune was designed to benefit the poor and working class over the wealthy. The Paris Commune secularized politics and education, provided subsidized food and housing, created a minimum wage, required private firms to have a delegation elected by the workers, recognized freedom of the press, and made all people legally equal. However, the Paris Commune only lasted for two months and ten days before it was crushed. Despite all the confusion and varying ideas on how to implement socialism, all those socialists were opposed to capitalism and believed the economic system was fundamentally doomed. One problem they believed capitalism had is its competitive nature which led to the continual driving down of profits. For example, suppose one business sells yogurt at $10 while a different business is willing to sell yogurt with the same or perhaps better quality at the much cheaper price of $7. Most people would buy from the cheaper business. The Socialists believed that eventually competition would lead to a decrease in profits to a level that businesses could barely eke out a profit. They also argued that businesses competed to sell their products at the same time workers competed to sell their labor. Socialists argued that this competition among workers was what caused workers to be paid only what they needed in order to afford the most basic food and housing and nothing more. They pointed out that as businesses started making less profits, they’d compensate by paying the workers even less wages until eventually only the most essential workers would be kept with the rest being laid off. Eventually, businesses that weren’t able to keep up would go out of business, causing even more unemployment among both the working and capitalist classes. At this point, socialists believed that either serious reforms or an outright revolution were needed to end capitalism and usher in an era of socialism. Among other reasons, this hasn’t happened in practice in the west because capitalism has been reformed to include elements of welfare and regulation, which has helped reduce inequality. But socialism is unsustainable over time. Drawbacks of Socialism Overall, proponents of socialism argue that it leads to equality, economic security, production for use rather than profit, and the kind of system in which people selflessly contribute to society according to their ability and receive all their needs. As a famous socialist slogan says, “From each according to their ability, to each according to their needs”. However, critics of socialism argue that the system is based on faulty principles and is too utopian to actually happen, and that ultimately the inherent inefficiencies of socialism will lead to major economic problems, with socialism suffering mainly from the motivation and knowledge problem. First, we must understand the motivation problem. One major problem with socialism is that it doesn’t truly reward people with tangible rewards for going beyond the minimum. For example, most people aren’t JUST working in their jobs

Machu Picchu Viscachas

Priscilla Chow, 8 (Palmetto Bay, FL) Machu Picchu Viscachas Priscilla Chow, 8 My family and I traveled on a train from Cusco to Machu Picchu. Once we got there at noon, we spotted two Machu Picchu viscachas on a wall. I asked our tour guide why there were squirrels there and he said that they’re Machu Picchu viscachas. They looked like squirrels to me; they were just a little bigger. They both had short oval ears, fluffy grey pelts, and long curly tails. The Machu Picchu viscachas were climbing the wall. They didn’t seem scared at all; they were probably used to people around. Then I suddenly noticed another Machu Picchu viscachas playing in the field. As we kept walking, we went by an arch. I saw one more Machu Picchu viscachas inside the stone arch. I was so shocked that there were so many Machu Picchu viscachas in Machu Picchu. In fact, I thought they didn’t really exist. Before this trip, I had read a fairytale on Machu Picchu viscachas and I thought they were just fictional. After this trip, I did some research on Machu Picchu viscachas and found out that they usually come out at dusk. Then I realized how lucky we were on that day! I also learned Machu Picchu viscachas, which can be called Inca rabbits, live in Cusco and Machu Picchu. My new knowledge of Machu Picchu viscachas included the facts that they eat grass, seeds, and insects, they belong to the Chinchillidae family, and their relative, the chinchilla, is an endangered species.

Heartless, Reviewed by April, 13

If you have read Alice in Wonderland before, the Queen of Hearts is most likely your least favorite character. She is temperamental—“Off with your head!”—and does several perplexing things, such as forcing her subjects to paint white roses red. But have you ever wondered how the Queen of Hearts’ foul personality came to be? In Heartless, author Marissa Meyer suggests that the queen was once a bright and lively girl named Catherine Pinkerton. In Meyer’s story, Catherine is the wealthy daughter of a marquess, and the King of Hearts wants to marry her—but, Catherine dreams of other things. She dreams of opening a bakery with her maid Mary Ann; she dreams of the support of her strict parents; she dreams of being able to make money without a husband. But, it’s the cold, hard truth that it’s nearly impossible for Catherine to open a bakery with financial or emotional support. No one would ever approve of her dreams, especially her parents. But everything changes when Jest, the court joker, makes his way into Catherine’s life. As she falls for the charming and witty commoner, Catherine begins to doubt the lavish life her parents have planned out for her even more. Is she really to marry the silly, bumbling King of Hearts, or can she find a way to open her bakery and end up with Jest? Can Catherine have her cake and eat it too? This book gave me all the giggles, thrills, and fever dreams of Lewis Carroll’s original novel, Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland, and I feel that Marissa Meyer has truly done the 1865 novel justice! Everything is described beautifully and accurately. If Heartless were an official prequel to Alice’s Adventures in Wonderland, I would not doubt it. Meyer develops the story so that Catherine is sweet and hopeful in the beginning, yet eventually ends up as the cruel Queen of Hearts because of a series of significant events. Far from hating Catherine, I felt that her motives were absolutely understandable and sympathized with her. The book offers an entirely new perspective concerning the queen’s temperament. Not to mention, this book is a food lover’s paradise—from luscious lemon tarts to macarons that are “sweet and delicate and smooth, with just a tiny crunch from the meringue, and a subtle floral moment from the distilled rose water,” you won’t be disappointed by the descriptions of dessert! The only thing I would note is the unnatural start of Catherine and Jest’s relationship. After just one encounter with Jest, Catherine begins to fall in love, which seems very rushed. Aside from that, though, the chemistry and dialogue between the two characters are just right. (Oops, wrong fairy tale!) The secondary characters are irresistible as well. The Cheshire Cat is hands down my favorite; while Catherine thinks him to be gossipy and unpredictable, the magical cat proves he is loyal, companionable, and surprisingly wise in multiple instances. Additionally, Hatta, who is the Mad Hatter in the original story, is interesting because he seems very confident and mysterious, yet there is anxiety and fear beneath his words. These secondary characters are written well enough to be brilliant on their own, but not so idiosyncratic that they take away from the main characters, Catherine and Jest. All in all, Heartless contains everything its readers wish for: romance, enigma, sass, suspense, and magic. This book will fill you up just as much as one of Catherine’s delicious treats.   Heartless by Marissa Meyer. Feiwel and Friends, 2016. Buy the book here and support Stone Soup in the process!