Under
capitalism, a class divided society resting upon the exploitation of
wage-labour, social justice is a contradiction in terms, a vague
platitude, a mere piece of political phrase-mongering. So-called
justice and injustice co-exist within the framework of the
private-property relationship of capitalism and are conditioned by
the class interest of the people involved. Justice from the
standpoint of the capitalist class must equate to the legal
recognition and enforcement of their minority monopoly of the means
of production. Since this leaves the working dais without means of
production, a socially inferior class compelled to sell their
physical and mental energies in order to live, the whole edifice of
capitalism rests upon built-in privilege and inequality. The
Socialist Party has always maintained that even if all the promises
and reform proposals of the reformist parties were carried out, the
poverty and insecurity of workers would remain. In fact it is the
continuing poverty and insecurity of the working class despite all
past reforms and legislation that repeatedly prompts further reform
demands to try to keep the worst excesses of the situation under
control. The working class still have to sell their physical and
mental energies to the capitalist class in order to live, and profit
remains the motive force behind production. The only meaningful use
of the term ‘social revolution’ is in the context of abolishing
this set-up. It is vital, in order to learn the futility of
reformism. Reforms beget reforms. All this tinkering with effects
leads nowhere.
Socialism
can be practiced only when a majority of the world’s population
want it and are determined to make it work; in other words, when they
are prepared to take equal shares of the responsibilities involved in
running it. And working-class responsibility is something the
capitalist class, consciously or not, does its very best to
discourage. One form of discouragement is the myth of the
'politician'—a specialist in rhetoric, wit, parliamentary
procedure, and vote-catching, who is obliged to play ‘a dirty
game’, who has no choice but to sacrifice his principles now and
then to his party’s interests or to pragmatism, and whose
‘political career' is capable of being ‘ruined’ when his
Cabinet colleagues or an ungrateful electorate stab him in the back.
“I leave that to the politicians’ is a common phrase. No, in
running society each one of us has an equal liability. It is a pity
that the political disillusionment so often talked about at present
is in most cases an excuse for cynical inaction or incoherent protest
rather than a spur to seeking a lasting cure.
Another
way of ensuring that the working class lacks responsibility is to
deny it opportunities for participation in controlling the means of
living. Of course, ‘participation’ is another of those well-worn
words but it consists merely of offering suggestions, giving
specialist advice, lobbying on behalf of particular groups, or voting
for one of a few alternatives — those alternatives which conflict
with ruling-class interests having been carefully sifted out
beforehand. True participation means being given all the facts to
consider taking into account proportionately the interests of all the
people who will be affected by the decision, and helping to work out
and vote on all the alternatives. When people are denied these
opportunities it isn’t surprising that they become apathetic,
irresponsible, and selfish and that there is political disillusion.
Responsibility
is inseparable from control, and control is in turn inseparable from
ownership.
No comments:
Post a Comment