Why war and how to stop it

Part of the aim of the socialist movement is the permanent elimination of war. Modern warfare war threatens not merely suffering and death to millions, but with the development of nuclear and biological weapons, the actual destruction of human civilisation, and for humanity a return to barbarism. The first step in the struggle against war is a clear understanding of the causes of war.

The driving force of the capitalist mode of production is the necessity for the continual accumulation and expansion of capital. This necessity is inescapable. Capitalists must constantly attempt to expand capital, in order to maintain profits. Capitalists of every major capitalist nation are faced with the following situation: In order to sustain the system which sustains them, they must find continuous outlets for capital investment and re-investment; but the internal market, provided by the capitalist mode of production within any single nation, is not, sufficient to re-convert into capital values the values of commodities turned out even by existing capital equipment, much less of new. Consequently, the capitalists of each nation are forced to seek outlets for capital investment (and likewise consumer markets) beyond the national borders. There must be added to this basic drive of capital for accumulation, the closely related struggle for sources of raw materials, for control of shipping routes, for the right to install military bases at geo-political strategic points around the globe and for the ability to manufacture in countries where the standard of living is lower than in the home country, and the determination of the home capitalists to keep the home market for their own purposes by tariff’s, and import quotas.

Since the world is limited in extent, since the areas available for new forms of capital expansion and exploitation are growingly restricted, conflict is not only likely but inevitable. The battles of the capitalists are fought on a world-wide scale. Into the neo-colonies and proxy-nations, those “spheres of influence”, flow the surplus capital funds, imperiously demanding to be set to work at making profits. The political arms of the capitalists – the governments of their respective countries – are extended watchfully over the new investments. They are ever ready to unseat a government by regime-change, intervene to stop “terrorism”, stop or start a revolution, send a flotilla of warships or a regiment of marines or declare a no-fly zone.  

The truth of the matter is capitalist society is continuously at war or constantly making preparations for war. The camouflage that war wears – appearing as due to “national” or “cultural” or “religious” differences must not be allowed to hide the fundamental conflicts which are the true source of modern war. Though these other factors may provide the final push that sets open war going or may modify the character of a war, there is nothing in their own nature that must necessarily lead to war. They are the tools of the forces making for war, not the cause of these forces. Modern war is neither accidental nor due to the evil of human nature nor decreed by God. War is of the very essence of capitalism, as much a part of capitalism as wage labour.

One misconception often made by anti-war campaigners comes from the wide-spread belief that this struggle is somehow “independent” of the class struggle in general, that a coalition of all sorts of persons from every social class and group can be formed around the issue of stopping war, since – so the reasoning goes – these persons may he all equally opposed to war whatever their differences on other points. War is thus considered something separate from its causes and conditions, an abstraction instead of a concrete historical institution. Acting on this belief, attempts are made to build up all kinds of permanent peace movements and anti-war alliances. At times they seem to settle a war situation “peacefully”, this is only because the interest of the dominant powers is against an immediate outbreak. Postponement serves only to assure a greater conflagration when the time comes. They serve, in point of fact, as additional means whereby the great powers can carry out their aggressive aims. In practice anti-war pacifism aids war: by spreading illusions about the nature of war and the fight against it; by shifting the energies of honest opponents of war to a fictitious fight against it; by sugar-coating the realities of capitalist society and thus making them – including war – more palatable. Some anti-war activisits will be  preparing a betrayal when its leaders will decide that a particular “humanitarian” crisis will make  this war different and call for the military intervention of the government. No, the pacifist way is not the way to fight war.

The only way to get rid of war is to remove the cause of war. War is not the cause of the troubles of society. The opposite is true. War is a symptom and result, of the irreconcilable troubles and conflicts of the present form of society, that is to say, of capitalism. The only way to fight; against war is to fight against the causes of war. Since the causes of war are an integral part of capitalism, it follows that the only way to fight against war is to fight against capitalism. But the only true fight against capitalism is the struggle for socialism. It therefore follows that the only possible struggle against war is the struggle for the socialist revolution.

The Socialist Party is absolutely clear on this point. There is no “separate” or “special” struggle against war. The struggle against war cannot be divorced from the struggle of the workersto establish a socialist society. No one can uphold capitalism – whether directly, as an open adherent of the capitalists, or indirectly, from any shade reformist position – and fight against war, because capitalism means war. Only a socialists can fight against war, because only a socialist advocates the road to the overthrow of capitalism. So to suppose, therefore, that the Socialist Party can ally “against war” with non-revolutionaries is a disastrous illusion. Any organisation based upon such a platform is not merely powerless to prevent war; in practice it acts to promote war, both because it serves in its own way to uphold the system that breeds war, and because it diverts the attention of its members from the real fight against war. There is only one method to wage war against war: socialist revolution. 

Revolution can and will eliminate war because, by overthrowing capitalist economy and supplanting capitalism with a socialist economy, it will remove the causes of war. With socialism there will no longer exist the basic contradictions that lead to war. The expansion of the means of production, under the ownership and control of society as a whole, will proceed in accordance with a rational plan adjusted to the needs of the members of society. Socialism will remove the limits on consumption, and hence permit the scientific and controlled development of production. Thus, inside a socialist system, war will disappear because the causes of war will have been removed.

It is the business of the Socialist Party, upon the outbreak of any war, to work to turn that war into a class war. The aim of the Socialist Party includes the elimination of wars of all kinds and we know that this can be accomplished only through one particular kind of war – the class war. All the fine phrases and noble sentiments and even the deep sincerity of pacifists are powerless against war, when not actually of assistance to the war-mongers. The knowledge that this is true is hard for many, even for some socialists, to accept. Many feel, it is important to share something in common the non-revolutionary millions from the working class who oppose war. They appeal for unity saying, we all agree in our opposition to war, in our repugnance to its barbarity, its cruelty and horror, and we both share an earnest wish to put an end to it. “Can we not all join together on this basis, leaving other differences aside?”  Surely, the addition of the reformers will offer greater forces to defend ourselves against war and its destruction and we will come into closer contact with them to win them gradually to our side on other questions.

Such sentiments are mistaken whatever their appearances. Socialists have little in common with these the anti-war opposition. The reason for this is that those who oppose war do not really oppose war at all. They do not, because they do not oppose the causes of war, and are not willing to take steps to remove these causes – that is, take revolutionary steps. Their “opposition” to war, therefore, is in the last analysis, a salve to soothe their consciences.

The Socialist Party takes to the platform and addresses the audience: “You believe you are opposed to war. Very well, we will take you at your word. If you are opposed to war, you must want to get rid of the causes of war. We will show you what the causes are ...” And proceed to demonstrate how real opposition to war must lead to a revolutionary position. Some have come into the socialist movement from anti-war activities. Many more will do so, if we make an intelligent and clear approach to them. Their anti-war stand, if carried to their logical conclusion must lead to a revolutionary understanding. But too much should not be expected: economic interest the powerful propaganda of the ruling class will, in the majority of cases, prevent anti-war activists from accepting the full reasoning of our position. But not in all cases and the Socialist Party does not ignore any avenue of approach. Thus the issue of anti-war is correctly seen as rich potential for socialist education and agitation. Workers honestly against war can be shown how only socialism will eliminate it. It is, therefore, necessary for socialist to attend anti-war protests and meetings not to pledge that “we are all engaged in a common fight”, but to present openly and unequivocally the socialist analysis of war and to show why all other analyses are wrong. It is the part of the duty of the Socialist Party to expose where we can the war plans and diplomatic manoeuvers of governments, offering analyses of treaty summits, armaments spending, and “war games in order to make clear to the working class the exact level of threat of war, and to pierce through the double-talk of the capitalist statesmen.

Some on the “radical” left propose the simplistic solution and very deceptive slogan, of “a general strike to stop the war,”. A general strike at the outbreak of a major war would be a revolutionary strike; only those who are prepared to carry it through to the revolutionary capture of the State by the workers can genuinely advocate it. It pre-supposes a tremendously advanced conscious working class because without this such a crucial political action would either evaporate or go quickly down in the uselessly spilled blood of the strikers. The State, staking its existence on embarking upon –war – is scarcely going to give up and accept defeat from abroad because of pressure at home and since it is prepared to sacrifice the lives of its troops, killing strikers and pickets to suppress the General Strike will scarcely register. Unless the pressure at home is at a level of a social revolution to overthrow the State and establish socialism then it must be prepared for defeat. War will be defeated only by the revolutionary struggle of the workers. The real building of socialism will be accomplished in the only way it can be accomplished by the self-emancipation of the working class understanding and conscious of its actions. Any other direction lies disaster, and the triumph of reaction.