The Socialist Party and Parliament

 

We are solely concerned with the establishment of socialism. This cannot be obtained until a majority of the workers want it and work for it. Once the workers do understand and want socialism, and without this socialism cannot be established, then they will vote delegates to Parliament to take control of political power for the sole purpose of establishing socialism.

In Britain, it is Parliament that makes the laws and provides for their enforcement. Parliament controls the armed forces and the police — two instruments of class oppression. It can therefore crush any attempt at the seizure of power by a minority. It will be able to continue doing so as long as the working class votes into power its economic and political enemies. The capture of political power and the machinery of government (Parliament) by a Socialist working class is necessary for the successful carrying through of the Socialist revolution. Before abolishing the need for Parliament it must first be captured. Our Declaration of Principles points out that the armed forces of the nation are controlled by Parliament, the centre of political power. Once the workers obtain a majority in Parliament, for the purpose of establishing Socialism, they will have control of the armed forces and no captain with ten soldiers will be able to disperse them.

Political power through control of the state machine is the means whereby the owning class is able to dominate society. There are no capitalists at factory gates reading proclamations about their ownership rights. Any disturbance at the factory gate is handled by police or, if it gets nasty, by the armed forces. These coercive agencies are under the direct control of the political machine. The legality of private property institutions is decided by the state. To gain possession of all the means of production and distribution by the whole community it is an inescapable necessity to capture political power. Obviously, only a worldwide working-class majority with a socialist understanding would be interested in gaining political power to end class society. Parliament is a capitalist institution now because the great majority of workers vote for capitalist parties. When the quality of the vote changes, so will the purpose for which it is put. Then, Parliament will be used to strip the capitalist class of their ownership of the means of living. What, in the final analysis, gives the licence for continuing capitalism is the workers’ approval of it. Fortunately, the democratic process cuts both ways. When the workers cease supporting capitalism and exploring blind alleys, they will vote for socialism.

The capitalist class, which, according to leftist folklore, could do nothing to stop the workers from taking over the factories, suddenly becomes endowed with mystic powers the moment the political field is discussed. The left hasn’t even learned that the capitalist as 'such does nothing. It is workers who run his state for him, just as they run his factories. What they are really saying is that workers in the civil service and armed forces would continue supporting capitalism. Even if this were true it could not determine the outcome of events. But there is nothing to insulate workers in government jobs or armed forces from the spread of socialist understanding. Socialist ideas will permeate all sections of the working class. The leftist industrial-actionists fail to grasp the significance of a world majority wanting socialism. This is part of the weakness of élitist thinking. They cannot visualise the workers being self-reliant and having no dependency on leaders.

The capitalist class have economic power because they have political power and not the other way around. They control the state machine and the armed forces through Parliament and are confirmed in their control by the working class at election times.

We are organised as a political party not out of preference (which implies that there are other ways of achieving our object) but because all the evidence of history and an analysis of capitalist society shows that this is the only way to achieve working-class emancipation. Without first gaining control of the state (the public organ of coercion and repression) through which the capitalists maintain their privileged relationship to the means of life by keeping the working class in its propertyless position, any minority movement seeking to challenge them will inevitably be beaten by the armed forces and the police who remain under the control of the capitalist class.

It does not follow that because Parliament is at present an institution of so-called “representatives” it must necessarily remain so. Once a working-class who knows what they want and how to get it sends their delegates to Parliament with a mandate to capture political control of the state machine, it will cease to function as an instrument of class rule and become the indispensable instrument for our emancipation.

Soviets cannot establish socialism

1. because they are economic organisations and not political; and

2. because they are based on the workplace, not on the centre of political power

Before an electoral demonstration of a socialist majority, socialist ideas will have penetrated all strata of society — including central and local government, the police and the armed forces and this would strengthen the growing demand for socialism.

However, control of the state machine is necessary

1. to lop off its repressive features, and in order:

2. to prevent any possibility of their being used in desperate attempts by counter-revolutionary groups to frustrate the wishes of the majority.

Armed forces will continue as long as capitalism because capitalism needs them. The capitalist class won't simply give up armed forces in the face of opposition. That is, they will still exist until consciously done away with.

We must point out that membership of the Socialist Party is dependent on acceptance of our aims and objectives set out in our Declaration of Principles. No one is forced to join or prevented from leaving through disagreement. What for example would be the point of an advocate of minority action attempting to join the Socialist Party, other than possibly to be disruptive? Such a person is at liberty to join organisations which advocate his or her views. Party members finding themselves in disagreement with the Declaration of Principles invariably leave the Party — what would be the point in remaining in an organisation dedicated to a method and object with which you disagree?