Reforms won't solve our problems

Our society is divided. Our planet is under threat. Our communities are suffering. The interconnected environmental, energy, economic, and inequality crises of the 21st century are posing complex and often-unpredictable challenges to communities around the world.  It’s time to build. Meaningful change will not happen until we adopt a world-view that seeks to change the root causes of the many social ills that afflict present-day society. Hunger, poverty and pollution are not technical problems in and of themselves, since solutions already exist to technically solve and provide for each of these. Our greatest challenge isn’t the technical application of solutions to create abundance for the world’s population. It is persuading and convincing our fellow-workers that these are feasible and socialism is possible. This task of education to instill awareness is so massive and important that it cannot be understated.

Today, there are repetitive occupations which simply do not need to exist given the state of automation and robotics. Not only would automation reduce the mundane burden and allow more free time for people, it also would, more importantly, increase productivity. Machines do not need breaks, vacations, sleep, etc.. The use of mechanization on its own means to create many forms of abundance on this planet, from food to physical goods. However, to do this, the wage-labour system we have must end. The reality is that the wages system is stifling progress in its requirement to make profits for the employing class.

The concept of property is a fairly new social concept. Before the neolithic revolution, as extrapolated from current hunter and gatherer societies existing today, property relationships did not exist as we know them. Neither did money. Communities existed in an egalitarian fashion, living within the carrying capacity of their regions and the natural production built in. It was only after direct agricultural development was discovered, eventually proceeding with resource acquisition by ship traders and the like - up to modern day power establishments and corporations - that property became a highly defined staple of society as we know it today.

There is growing view among environmentalists that the affluent regions of the global economy must dramatically reduce overall resource and energy consumption levels – that is, undergo a process of ‘degrowth’ – if humanity is to bring about a sustainable world order. On the other hand, we have a growth economy that cannot go two steps in this direction without causing huge economic and social problems. As well as there are vast numbers of poor who require to be brought up to decent levels of living standards. If we need to degrow the economy, as it appears we do, how is that done without causing utter social chaos and societal breakdown? The World Socialist Movement say it must be done by creating a rational steady-state economy.

Our present system is the capitalist market economy.  This system has certain defining features that mark it out as unique compared to other economic systems humans have devised.  It is a system in which a) most (if not all) the major means of production are privately (these days corporately) owned by a small minority of the population; and b) where the fundamental economic problems (what, how, and for whom to produce) are solved “automatically”, through the price mechanism, rather than through conscious social decisions. Most importantly the system is also characterised by a growth compulsion, to expand. Due to competition, all firms – particularly large shareholder firms – are under constant pressure to invest in new techniques, methods of production and products, to improve competitiveness and their sales figures. If they fail to do this, they not only risk profits margins but also eventually being taken-over by other firms, or made bankrupt. Since no firm wants to perish, and since all must expand if they want to continue to exist, a general growth compulsion arises, not just for individual firms, but for the macro economy as whole.

So, while almost everyone wants growth, it is also true that the system needs growth for its basic functioning. In fact, the system cannot possibly tolerate even a slow-down in the rate of growth, let alone a contraction. The famed ‘efficiency’ of the market system only works well (if at all) when there is a buyers’ market, leading to strong competition between suppliers to meet customer demand. But in a contraction scenario, most markets would be ‘suppliers’ markets, as there would be, in general, a shortage of supply relative to demand. This would mean even poorly run, high cost firms would be able to survive. And, as with any market economy, you would still have a situation where increasingly scarce resources were tended to be allocated to meeting the money backed demands of the already wealthy, rather than to meeting the vital needs for all – a recipe for social chaos in a context of heightened scarcity. When capitalism approaches a ‘steady state’ of zero GDP growth the outcome for society at large is ugly. The situation is characterised by capital destruction, mass unemployment, devastated communities, growing poverty, foreclosures, homelessness and environmental considerations shunted aside in the all-out effort to restore growth.

Herman Daly argues that we can do so, while retaining a basically capitalist system, on the condition that the state steps in to play a far more active regulatory role than at present. Daly proposes that the state impose escalating resource depletion quotes, that can be traded in a market, while retaining private enterprise and the market system. Socialists argue, however, that this will not work. The contraction of the economies of the world must occur in an orderly way. Otherwise there will be unbearable breakdowns of whole societies. An orderly contraction can only take place in a planned economy, not in a capitalist market economy. A planned economy can consciously use labour-intensive technologies and methods, if necessary, which result in less use of resources. A socialist economic framework will be necessary if we are to contract the economy in an orderly, peaceful and socially just way. In arguing for large-scale industrial planning, we are not saying that we should nationalise family farms, local artisans, groceries, bakeries, neighbourhood restaurants and repair shops, workers’ cooperatives, and so on. Small producers aren’t destroying the world. But large-scale corporations are. If we want to save the planet, the corporations would have to be socialised, and completely reorganised and repurposed. This will be based on the active participation and cooperation of most, if not all, ordinary citizens. Active and inclusive participation by all (or at least most) is a crucial pre-requisite and it simply cannot be imposed ‘top-down’ via the State even if it wanted to. The revolution happens when ordinary citizens take it upon themselves to start building the new world. Unless participants within the socialist movement become aware of, and begin advocating, the eventual need for an orderly process of revolution it will not achieve a sustainable society. Capitalism itself must go onto the trash-can of history. Socialists must doggedly go on raising awareness wherever we can. Even if it does not feel like it, every conversation counts.

The Socialist Party understands the true nature of the challenges we as a society face, what the underlying, systemic forces are at play. Acting without this understanding is like putting a band-aid on a life-threatening injury. The Socialist Party supports the principle, according to one religious idiom, all God’s children deserve a fair share of the Earth’s bounty. Let us openly and loudly declare our commitment to the death of poverty and the birth of socialism.  Onward to the cooperative commonwealth.