I've actually proposed this very kind of scenario; I was thinking, Hapsburgs or some other Catholic monarchy in southern Germany. In the wake of the 1848 revolutions, some Catholic monarchy--not necessarily the monarch himself, but some high-ranking royal, say the crown prince, gets involved with a bunch of Jesuits who engage in a debate with Marx himself and cook up a kind of Christian Hegelianism heavily influenced by Marx's economic ideas, to patch up the social conflicts in their realm and at the same time manage a dirigiste economic policy meant to grow the realm's economic standing. Recognizing the Marxist economic concepts but asserting that a suitably enlightened and compassionate monarchy has the authority and duty to manage the show so as to both maximize useful growth and ensure that the working classes get their fair share. It would be socialistic to the extent that the monarch recognizes the workers get to have a say in the process, via legalized and regulated unions or via a bureaucracy that the workers can recognize does listen to their concerns and advice. But the idea is top-down, not bottom-up; the monarchy recognizes it has to get ahead of the curve and not let the commons develop the pressure themselves lest they get the idea they can run the show without the help of a king. A Catholic monarch with much clout in the Vatican, such as the Hapsburgs, could leverage the Papacy blessing it despite its Red, atheistic antecedents and suitably "baptize" it in Medieval Catholic doctrine; suitable precedents can doubtless be interpreted from Thomas Aquinas and the like.
Certainly Marx himself often looked to medieval examples when framing his concepts of the labor theory of value.
Hard Reds like Marx would reject and scorn the idea of course; the question is, could the monarchy deliver results good enough to build up solid support for the regime in the working classes without alienating the middle and upper classes? It's a tightrope to walk, but in addition to the incentive to preempt radical revolution the regimes I'm thinking of were at an economic disadvantage in the Victorian age; continental economists, Germans in particular, were quite critical of the British economic schools of laissez-faire and keen to consider alternative approaches. Besides avoid revolution the goal would be to achieve economic development and thus military security.
I happen to think Marx had a very solid understanding of capitalist economics and so this kind of top-down management looking at it through the lens of the labor theory of value, modified to support class society by defining the duty of the propertied and managerial classes as delivering superior results for the shared benefit of all thus justifying their high share of it could work and might result in a higher level of development in places like Austria-Hungary, and at the same time check the disruptive ambitions of reactionary elements and preempt the equally disruptive tendencies of labor radicalism.
I can't claim I think it would have been terribly likely but the OP here is an open invitation to get the scenario off my chest, and yes I do think that it might have worked. The hard part is getting the monarchy to try it, and then to competently follow through.
Certainly Marx himself often looked to medieval examples when framing his concepts of the labor theory of value.
Hard Reds like Marx would reject and scorn the idea of course; the question is, could the monarchy deliver results good enough to build up solid support for the regime in the working classes without alienating the middle and upper classes? It's a tightrope to walk, but in addition to the incentive to preempt radical revolution the regimes I'm thinking of were at an economic disadvantage in the Victorian age; continental economists, Germans in particular, were quite critical of the British economic schools of laissez-faire and keen to consider alternative approaches. Besides avoid revolution the goal would be to achieve economic development and thus military security.
I happen to think Marx had a very solid understanding of capitalist economics and so this kind of top-down management looking at it through the lens of the labor theory of value, modified to support class society by defining the duty of the propertied and managerial classes as delivering superior results for the shared benefit of all thus justifying their high share of it could work and might result in a higher level of development in places like Austria-Hungary, and at the same time check the disruptive ambitions of reactionary elements and preempt the equally disruptive tendencies of labor radicalism.
I can't claim I think it would have been terribly likely but the OP here is an open invitation to get the scenario off my chest, and yes I do think that it might have worked. The hard part is getting the monarchy to try it, and then to competently follow through.