All sorts of appeals are made to the Socialist Party to join forces with these anti-war organisations, but it declines any alliance. Not because we do not yearn for the cessation of the war. By no means so. Members of the Socialist Party above all others understand the horror of war. But we cannot associate with the various "Peace" and "Stop the War" movements.
Firstly, because we stand for socialism and they do not. Because we refuse to associate with those who support the capitalist class during "peace" time and who fight for the subjection of the working class. Therefore we cannot ally ourselves with these capitalists and clergymen and politicians. We refuse to lower the socialist red flag to march alongside our class enemies.
The second reason we cannot unite with the stop the war movement is that they simply cannot succeed and are impotent so it would be foolish to join in futile campaigns. Appeals to governments are the general methods yet they leave in power the makers of wars, the capitalist class. They intend to let the profit-making system which itself produces commercial rivalry and inevitably international warfare to continue. Supposing that nuclear weapons could be banned. If two nations, possessing the necessary technical knowledge and possessing the components, should quarrel seriously enough over the things wars are really fought for— markets, sources of raw materials, strategic Bases, etc—and even supposing they commenced fighting with “conventional,” “moral” weapons, would not the losing side set its scientists to producing nuclear weapons in order to stave off defeat? If history is anything to go by, the side which was winning would use the nukes and justify this by claiming it had brought hostilities to a speedier conclusion
Surely it is no longer doubted that wars are born of the fight for spoil between capitalists. Under capitalism, even in times of peace, states are always in competition with each other over markets, sources of raw materials, investment outlets, trade route and other economic and strategic questions. When it comes to negotiating over these differences the existence of a powerful armed force in the background is an important factor in the relationship of forces which decides the outcome. So each state is obliged to try to obtain the most modern and most effective (destructive) arms that it can afford, irrespective of whether or not it is actually involved in a conflict at home or abroad.
The level of a state’s armament is part of its negotiating strength and general credibility. This is why there is always a vast international market for arms of all sorts which no capitalist country which has an arms-producing capacity is going to refuse to supply for “moral” reasons. This is especially so in the current period of economic crisis when every little export helps.
The Socialist Party fights for the removal of a system of society which works out to the detriment of the many. The crusaders for peace are out for an alteration in the method of government whereby the wars between capitalist countries can be reduced or abolished. Socialism declares in favour of a new system wherein capital and capitalist governments cease to be. Peace propagandists by no means unite in condemning capitalist society, and they are mostly opposed to a change in the system altogether. What is the Socialist Party's attitude to war? It is that war as we know it is produced in the main by the conflict between the interests of capitalists of various nations. It is born of the rivalry between sellers of goods for profit, and it can only die when selling for profit is abolished. In other words, the socialist theory holds and capitalist practice proves that only by ending the entire capitalist system can war with all its attendant horrors cease. If you wish to stop all wars you must stop all capitalist competition and to do this you must work for socialism.
Capitalism generates wars because it is organised in such a way that its wealth can only be produced and distributed by a process of competition. The industries of capitalism are the private property of a small class of persons, and wealth is produced primarily for sale with a view to profit. A capitalist enterprise requires markets, trade routes, supplies of wage labour, raw materials, places to invest capital, and the power of a state to protect these interests. The foreign policy of a capitalist state attempts to acquire these needs in its relations with other countries. The rub is that there are several capitalist states in the world competing intensively for the same needs, and the size of the planet is limited. They must necessarily come into conflict with one another; and if the conflict cannot be settled or negotiated to the satisfaction of all parties concerned, they go to war. In competing for their essential business needs, capitalist countries seek control over territories in which they can sell goods, and from which they can extract profit and raw materials.
The Socialist Party would point out that the war is part of a whole related pattern of social problems generated by capitalism; and because it is part of a related pattern, the war cannot be attacked in isolation from the rest of the pattern or from its roots in the needs of capitalist society; the only way this problem, and others like it, can be permanently solved is to establish a system of society in which the means of production are owned and democratically controlled by the whole people, and goods are produced for use and not for competitive exchange and profit.
The whole point of modern war is that it comes from the capitalist social system. The only way to prevent war is to establish socialism. If capitalism is to be overthrown women and men have to work together for socialism. Common ownership will foster new kinds of relationships between human beings. Women and men will, at last, be free to live life as they choose, to cooperate with each other in building a future in which we will no longer be exploited for profit.
No comments:
Post a Comment