Moulding the New Man - Moral Education

 Moral Education

The inculcation of communist morality is a process in which the people perceive the basic requirements and principles of the communist code of morals, a process in which man’s behaviour and his character are shaped in accordance with these principles. Moral upbringing is a major component of communist education, and the consolidation of the principles of communist morality and the voluntary observance of the rules of communist human association are one of the cardinal tasks in the moulding of the new man. Before dealing with ways and means of inculcating communist morality we must examine its principles and requirements.
Moral Education

Communist Morality

Communist morals, which spring from the best achievements of human moral progress, mirror the interests and ideals not of a handful of exploiters but of the vast majority of mankind.

They have absorbed simple human moral norms that mankind has evolved in a struggle against moral vices and handed down from one generation to another. Since time immemorial it has been considered moral to maintain law and order, protect the life and health of people against criminals, show respect for aged people and consideration to women, help the sick or victims of elemental calamities, and so forth. Without these elementary standards society could not have existed, let alone developed, for it would not have differed from a herd of animals.

Under capitalism these elementary standards of human association have been transgressed, twisted and adapted by the exploiters to suit their own interests. In socialist society they are the code of behaviour of the bulk of the people, and when communism is built they will become second nature to every citizen.

Communist morality has also absorbed the people’s diligent attitude to work and their intolerance of idlers and parasites, their fraternal solidarity, mutual assistance, straightforwardness, honesty, will-power and courage. It has enriched these qualities, raised them to a higher level and given them a different social content.

The communist code of morals is that of the working class, the most advanced revolutionary class of modern times. This code emerged in capitalist society where the proletariat had to evolve definite standards of behaviour in its struggle against capitalism, for socialism and social progress.

Brought into existence under capitalism as an expression of the proletariat’s protest against exploitation and inequality and its desire to establish rules of human association founded on relations of friendship, comradeship, co-operation and mutual assistance among people freed from exploitation, the communist code of morals becomes predominant with the destruction of capitalism and the triumph of socialism. When communism becomes supreme in the world, when people are forever delivered from exploitation and the ethical burden of the past, it will be the one and only code of human association.

The fact that it serves the class interests of the proletariat, which is the most progressive class, and the struggle for the establishment of the most advanced society, makes it the most progressive code of morals, and it may be described as the greatest achievement of human ethical thinking. Communist morals thus mirror the objective laws of progress, of man’s inevitable advance to the new, communist future.

Basic Moral Principles of the Builder of Communism

Communist morality is reflected in the moral code of the builder of communism formulated in the Programme of the C.P.S.U.

Serving the proletarian class struggle, communist morality pursues the goal of facilitating the completion of communist construction. Its point of departure is that a person is virtuous if he contributes to society’s progress towards communism and immoral if he hinders this onward movement. The struggle for the new society is not only the fundamental goal of communist morality but also the criterion, a scientific criterion at that, of moral behaviour. Another indication of the scientific nature of communist morality is that Marxism-Leninism, the only really scientific world outlook, forms its theoretical foundation. Showing the content of communist morality and generalising mankind’s ethical progress and, in particular, the best features of people’s behaviour in the building of socialism and communism, the moral code embraces the following main principles: 

• dedication to communism and devotion to the socialist motherland and other socialist countries; 
• conscientious work for the benefit of society; he who does not work, neither shall he eat; 
• concern for safeguarding and multiplying social wealth; a lofty sense of civic duty and intolerance of infringements of social interests; 
• collectivism and comradely mutual assistance; one for all and all for one; 
• humane relations and mutual respect between people; man is to man a friend, comrade and brother; 
• honesty and integrity, moral purity, simplicity and modesty in social and private life; 
• mutual respect in the family, concern for the upbringing of children; 
• intolerance of injustice, parasitism, dishonesty, careerism and money-grubbing; 
• friendship and fraternity among all the peoples of the U.S.S.R., intolerance of national and racial hatred; 
• intolerance of the enemies of communism, peace and freedom; 
• fraternal solidarity with the working people of all countries, with all nations.

It goes without saying that each of the principles of the moral code has a significance of its own in the life and development of society and in the behaviour of individuals. The most important of these principles are devotion to communism and intolerance of its enemies, a communist attitude to work and social property, honesty and truthfulness, collectivism and humanism, socialist patriotism, the readiness to sacrifice one’s life in Defending the gains of socialism, and internationalism. These cardinal principles determine the rules of behaviour in society and people’s concept of good and evil, honour and dishonour, justice and injustice.

Morality and Knowledge

The link between morality and knowledge was brought to light long ago by bourgeois ethical thinking. However, bourgeois ethical thinking failed to show the nature of this link and whether all knowledge leads to moral improvement and whether every moral advance consolidates the strength of the intellect.

One of the most important and difficult tasks of the socialist revolution is to turn knowledge into a means of achieving moral improvement, to link knowledge up with morality and subordinate them to the purpose of promoting man’s harmonious development. This unity is attained through work, through practical activity in building the new society. Work alone can form a bridge between knowledge and morality and create the possibility of utilising scientific knowledge to consolidate lofty communist ideals.

Knowledge serves as a compass for man’s behaviour in his day-to-day life. At the same time, the lofty principles of communist morality demand that man should acquire the knowledge that enables mankind to move forward and teach him how to use this knowledge in order to benefit and not harm people. This is precisely where the unity between knowledge and morality manifests itself.

The striving to perform an exploit and do everything possible for the triumph of the new cause is firmly becoming part of the day-to-day life of Soviet people. This is seen in the achievements of Soviet space explorers, builders, scientists, workers and collective farmers.

Naturally, substantial knowledge was needed to arrive at these achievements. However, knowledge alone is not enough. An exploit is a practical matter and involves labour, which in its turn, presupposes not only knowledge but also the ability to apply this knowledge. An exploit may thus be described as being an alloy consisting of labour, knowledge and morals.

Some people hold that there are no grounds for speaking of unity between knowledge and morality. Indeed, these people argue, is there a scientific criterion of the morality of an action?

Outwardly, progress in morals may, naturally, be not as striking and effective as progress in science. But does this detract from the “might and merit" of the simple principles of lofty morality that working people had evolved in the course of centuries of struggle against oppression and moral vices? Has socialism, which has absorbed these simple moral standards, not established new principles of morality, which underlie the life and dignity of Soviet people? Has Marxism not formulated the objective, scientific criterion that makes it possible to weigh people’s actions and distinguish between good and evil? “ Communist morality,” Lenin wrote, “is based on the struggle for the consolidation and completion of communism.” [319•* Good is what helps mankind to move forward to the new society. Communist morality is indissolubly linked up with and forms the basis of education. Lenin exhorted young people to acquire knowledge not as a result of boredom, not for their own satisfaction but for the sake of the new society and the consolidation of the principles of communist morality. A genuine Communist is a highly educated person with lofty morals. Lenin wrote: “The entire purpose of training, educating and teaching the youth of today should be to imbue them with communist ethics.” [320•*

While underestimating morality, some people overestimate knowledge, particularly knowledge of mathematics. “Mathematics,” they write, “imbues man with honesty more than ethics does.” Or: “Hard and fast conclusions about the behaviour of people issue from contemporary views about the organisation of the Universe and about the nature of man.” Yet it is well known that people holding the same views about the Universe and nature often follow antipodal moral principles. The reason for this is that the force of the impact of science (we have in mind the natural sciences which do not directly influence morals) on morality depends on the class affiliation of the person concerned on his world outlook. Marxist science is precisely the world outlook that shows man how to use knowledge: for evil or for the good of men.

Overestimation of knowledge to the detriment of morality inflicts grave harm on education. However, similar harm is caused by underestimating the role of knowledge in man’s ethical improvement, i.e., by the belief that if man is immoral knowledge will not help him to improve. One of the personalities in Anton Chekhov’s play Ivanov argued that if a mediocre rascal is armed with culture and science he will become a brilliant rascal. There is a black sheep in every flock, and in Soviet society, too, there are people who do not profit by education. Essentially these black sheep are well-educated but they isolate themselves from their surroundings and wish to see nothing except their own knowledge. These people consider that society’s ethical demands of them are unfounded. They feel that if they have mastered say, physics, chemistry or mathematics and, on top of that, love music, the theatre and literature, society must remain satisfied with their erudition and make no moral demands of them. Knowledge, it must be emphasised, does not release a person from moral responsibility.

One of the great objectives of communist education is to achieve unity between knowledge and morality.

Needs As a Factor of Man’s Behaviour

To educate a person in the spirit of communist morality means to teach him to behave in accordance with the principles underlying this morality. On what does the behaviour of a person depend? Man is a thinking being and his behaviour and actions are conscious and purposeful. Before undertaking any action, a person creates in his mind an ideal image of this action. However, his needs are the direct source of this ideal action and, in the long run, of his practical behaviour. Conscious needs turn into a conscious objective resting on knowledge, interests, desire and so forth, which directly govern man’s behaviour.

The fact that needs are regarded as the main factor governing a person’s behaviour by no means belittles the significance of psychical acts. However, these acts become a stimulant of behaviour only because they are founded on one need or another. Needs are the inner foundation of all motives behind human actions.

The circumstance that inducements play a considerable role in man’s behaviour is definitely not denied by the founders of Marxism. On the contrary, they considered that ideas acquire tremendous material force when they capture the minds of the masses. However, this happens only when these ideas and theories express the needs of the masses. “In every people theory is implemented only to the extent it represents the implementation of this people’s needs.. .. Will theoretical needs become direct practical needs?”

Marx and Engels criticised the protagonists of the materialist theories preceding them for regarding ideal motives in the behaviour of people as the end and only causes of social developments instead of investigating what lay behind these motives and analysing what induced these ideal inducements. Pre-Marxian materialist philosophers failed to understand that socio-historical practice for the sake of satisfying needs was the foundation of human activity. Engels wrote: “Men became accustomed to explaining their actions from their thoughts instead of from their needs (which in any case are reflected in their thoughts, come to consciousness in the mind).”322

The assertion that needs are the key factor governing man’s behaviour does not in the least belittle the determining role played by the social environment and, in particular, material production in man’s development, including the growth of his needs. Production and social conditions comprise the prime cause and end foundation of man’s behaviour. However, production cannot influence man and his behaviour except through his needs. Production creates the material for the satisfaction of needs as well as the forms of their satisfaction and thereby (through needs and the satisfaction of these needs) determines man’s behaviour and actions. Production awakens needs in the consumer and thereby stimulates (through needs) his labour, political and spiritual activity aimed at creating the means for satisfying these needs.

Hence, the system of factors stimulating man’s behaviour may be described as follows: natural and social surroundings (production, class and other social relations, ideology and the corresponding institutions and organisations, system of education, culture, and so forth), needs (material, spiritual, and so forth), the consciousness of needs (in the shape of interests, desires, aspirations, objectives, and so on), motivation for action, decision to act, and action.

In this system of factors the primary, decisive role is played by the social environment, which not only gives rise to needs but also to the conditions for satisfying them. Needs arise as a result of man’s interaction with his surroundings and are the outcome of the influence of these surroundings on him. The last link in the system of stimuli consists of action (behaviour), in which decision is realised and which is likewise directed towards the surroundings with the purpose of satisfying needs.

All the links in the system of factors governing man’s behaviour are interrelated and interacting. The environment engenders needs; needs, in their turn, give rise to individual consciousness in the form of definite interests, aspirations, inclinations, purposes, and so on. Consciousness gives birth to motivation; motivation leads to decision. Decision is followed by action. For its part, being directed at the environment, action changes it. At the same time, this changes the personality itself, inasmuch as the changed environment engenders new needs, which in their turn 323 give rise to a new consciousness. Every link of this system not only acts on the next link but also influences the inducement giving rise to that link. For example, springing from a need, consciousness itself influences the formation of that need. Through the above-mentioned links, a need governs action, which in turn ensures the satisfaction of that need, and the latter leads to other needs, and so on.

In organising man’s moral education, it is important to take into account the interaction of all the factors governing his behaviour and not solely the factor stimulating consciousness as is frequently done. For instance, in teaching people to take a communist approach to their work it is not enough to make them aware only of the fact that work is an objective need, a sacred duty and a matter of honour and heroism. Had this been the sole requirement, it would have been possible to consider that already today every Soviet citizen had adopted a communist attitude to his work because he knows these general principles. The principal and ultimate goal of labour education is to turn labour into a habit so that the need to work for the benefit of society is the motive behind labour activity. The same may be said of the objective of moral education, namely, that the standards of communist morality, which are at present followed out of a sense of duty and, sometimes, by compulsion, should become an inner inducement, i.e., that they would be fulfilled as an inner need.

Formation of Needs as a Principal Means of Moral Education

Insofar as needs govern man’s behaviour, the formation of reasonable and healthy needs is indispensable for the moulding of communist morality. Morality, as we all know, characterises the standards and rules of behaviour in society and people’s relations to one another and to society.

The formation of needs is not a single act but a long and complex process embracing virtually man’s entire lifespan from birth to death, because as man grows and develops his place in society and his goals and aspirations change, and this is inconceivable without the formation of corresponding needs, the correction of these needs and the rejection of some and the acquiring of others.

The formation of not just any needs but only reasonable and healthy needs is the basis of moral education because these are the only needs that can make man behave in accordance with the lofty principles of communist morality.

Inasmuch as needs as well as the form of human intercourse and activity are stimulated only through objects or phenomena (material or spiritual), it is important to create objects that cultivate in man the needs and interests which ’conform with lofty communist ideals. One of the cardinal conditions for shaping needs is to place the corresponding material values as well as objects of spiritual production at man’s disposal. Moreover, it is important to teach every person not only rationally to utilise social values but also to create these values, i.e., to engage in socially useful work to the best of his ability.

In socialist society there is no place for plunderers of public property, for those whose needs are not commensurate with their own contribution to social wealth, for those who seek to satisfy their needs at the expense of the people around them. He who does not work has no right to the satisfaction of his requirements.

In the process of imbuing people with the need for work, which is the foundation for the satisfaction of all other needs, the latter, acquire the nature of a lofty moral aspiration which is the sole vehicle for the improvement of all of man’s physical and spiritual qualities. The profound meaning underlying all educational work, A.. S. Makarenko wrote, lies “in the selection and formation of human needs, in raising them to the moral summit that can only be attained in a classless society and which alone can stir man to aspire to further improvement".

It goes without saying that in socialist society not all citizens have learned to harmonise their needs with their duties, with socially useful activity. The inability or lack of desire to adjust needs to one’s labour contribution is one of the main direct reasons for immorality and, frequently, for crime. Indeed, can one deny that excessive needs give rise to immoral features such as money-grubbing, greed, an unhealthy lust for luxury, dishonesty, careerism, egoism, disregard for the interests of other people, theft, bribery, and so forth?

The formation of needs is the business of the family, the school, the place of work and the whole of society.325

The foundations of genuinely human needs are laid in the family when a person is very young. Therefore, jointly with the school, the place of work and society as a whole, the family must shape in people the need for work and knowledge, for intercourse with other people and for noble actions, without which lofty moral qualities cannot be moulded. We all know, for example, that knowledge ennobles man, raises his level of culture, and imbues him with love for nature and respect for other people and nations. Thus, the formation and satisfaction of aesthetic needs likewise play an important role in moral education. A person who feels an inner need to build life according to the laws of beauty mixes well with other people and is conscious of and appreciates the beauty of human labour and of harmonious, truly human relations between people. Also important in the moral upbringing of a person is the formation of the need for movement, for physical improvement. Physical culture and sports train people to be persevering and courageous, and to surmount difficulties, and steel their will-power.

In the shaping of man’s behaviour a prominent role is played by the sphere of services which embraces various fields of economy and culture. One group of these fields (trade, public catering, communal services, and so forth) ensures the satisfaction primarily of material needs. Another group (education, public health, culture, art, and so on) specialises in the satisfaction mainly of spiritual and other non-material needs.

Efficient services, aesthetic attractiveness and smooth organisation, attention, politeness and competence on the part of the services personnel, the swift and qualitative fulfilment of orders, and so on help to foster good tastes and habits in consumers, make it possible to organise everyday life rationally, preserve people’s health, keep them in good spirits and give them additional leisure time which they can use for the satisfaction of other, chiefly spiritual needs, for the upbringing of children.

The formation of healthy and reasonable needs presupposes a struggle against pernicious needs, whose satisfaction frequently leads to misdemeanours that clash with the standards of communist morality. Take drunkenness, for example. It is a dreadful social evil, to say nothing of the 326fact that it is immoral, that it leads to violations of production discipline, poisons people’s lives, breaks up families and, lastly, leads to crime.

The socialist system has every possibility for stamping out this and any other evil. But it would be wrong to think that this pernicious need will disappear by itself. Neither can it be uprooted by measures of compulsion, although such measures are necessary. The main thing is that really human needs should be set off against this and other unhealthy needs, that the former should be fostered and conditions created for their satisfaction. In moral education it is important to form lofty spiritual needs and to teach people to utilise their leisure time rationally with the purpose of satisfying these needs.

Communist society, which the close-knit family of Soviet peoples is building, will ensure complete harmony between needs and people’s behaviour. The needs of every person will be truly human and behaviour in the spirit of the lofty principles of communist morality will itself be an inner need. Man’s majesty and beauty will be expressed in the wealth of his capabilities and needs and in his resultant gracious behaviour.