Observations on Fascism

Definitions matter because imprecision leads to carelessness when clarity is necessary. The term “fascism” has been bandied about by all and sundry, to the point of risking losing its sting, its cutting edge, and becoming instead the catch-all for every social movements or the  political antics of individuals. , allowing the more dangerous causal factors, e.g., capitalism, militarism, etc., to remain in shadow  therefore neglected. Fascism comes in many forms; one size does not fit all, tempting as such an analysis might be. Nor is there an historical line drawn in the sand, the crossing of which acts to confirm the genuine article. This is merely to warn against the construction of simplistic models.  Indeed, models are a waste of energy; history is a better guide for us.

Fascism’s many guises—Mussolini’s Italy, Franco’s Spain, Hitler’s Germany; all are relevant, and perhaps even constituting a unified sequential historical phase. But that isn’t good enough, at least to account for the historical forces post-1945, although certainly beginning earlier, which define fascism in modern times. The concentration camp is no longer a sure-fire indicator, not when techniques of surveillance are being perfected and mass manipulation, particularly via consumerism and political propaganda from all quarters, has taken its place in softening the body politic and inducing conformity and complacence. Today fascism speaks with a mellow voice  and dons softened gloves, the better to achieve the regimentation of thought and opinion heretofore reliant on force. Force is externalized, propelled forward to maintain hegemonic aspirations and, on the side, enlist the populace at home into the display of fervent patriotic support, without which the total formation might stagnate, fall backward, or actually crumble.  Fascism represents sustainment of the existing structure of wealth and power whilst the political economy itself bounds ahead—that is, the conservation of the Old Order under the conditions of modern industrialism.

From Here

Some Rough Notes on Tax

The bosses have tried every imaginable remedy for the crisis. To no avail. Now they hope to find a lever to raise their profits by lowering taxes. The campaign to lower taxes has swept the bourgeois world like wildfire. Through every avenue at their command the capitalists and the landlords are clamoring for economy in government. They want “cheap government” and the support of the working class to force a curtailment of expenses. We workers are robbed as producers, robbed of the surplus labor, of the surplus value which the capitalist divide among themselves as profits, rent, interest and to pay their office boys’ (government) and for the gangster racketeers who rob the robbers.

The government (the state) operates for the benefit of the capitalists, owners of the basic means of production and circulation of all commodities and wealth. Government functions through an army of administrators and officials who must be supported. Taxation is the general method by which capitalists collect State revenues to keep the State going. Under the modern development of capitalism, however, the State has been impelled to undertake large economic tasks which private capitalists may not be able to do, such as the welfare  provisions for the young and old,  the sick and the infirm, and those unable to work, as well as construction of transport infrastructure and communications networks, research and development projects, and, of course, defence which all  call for large expenditures to be met by taxation. The government is often placed under huge debts by the capitalists so that heavy interest rates have to be paid through taxation. Taxes can assume many forms and without taxes the State could not maintain itself. Modern capitalism has also requires adequate housing, sanitation, health, and educational facilities. For this the State must impose and collect tax.

But on whom can the tax be levied? It is clear that taxes can be paid only by those who have the wherewithal to pay them. Taxes, on the whole, must be paid by the propertied classes, by the big and the small bourgeoisie who are divided into many sub-sections each one trying to throw the weight of taxation onto the others. Hence a bitter fight arises over which sections of the capitalist class shall have the dominant voice in the taxation process. A myriad of ways are found to minimize the effects or to avoid taxation by the various groups, including: tricks of omissions evasion and avoidance, exceptions, exemptions, rebates, preferences, tariff arrangements, subsidies, etc.. One thing capitalism cannot do is kill the goose that lays the golden egg; it must not destroy by taxation the overall production or productive development of the country. Since capitalism is the structure of a country’s economic strength and power, the State must not hamper too greatly that growth by taxation.

As part of the cost of business the capitalists have to pay wages. Generally the worker receives in return for the sale of his labor power to his employer wages that will buy necessities enough to: (a) replenish that labor power, (b) allow the worker to keep in reasonably good health, (c) allow the worker to go to and from work and to seek work freely, (d) allow the worker to maintain an average family to reproduce children who will survive to become the wage-slaves in the future, including the maintenance of a wife and aged parents, (e) permit the family to survive in bad time of depression and of unemployment, as well as in good times of prosperity, since both aspects are inevitable processes under capitalism.

Wages paid the workers have to be large enough to be sufficient to cover periods of unemployment and to provide for old age.  In the past often this level of wages had not been paid and long periods of unemployment have found a destitute and rebellious working class increasingly difficult to control, especially as these workers became class-conscious. Hence arises the need for establishing a compulsory unemployment saving fund that will at least partially guarantee that the wages paid will cover periods of unemployment as well.

The level and items of expenditure needed to pay for the consumption for the replenishment of lost labor power naturally can and does vary regionally and nationally and according to individual and family needs. Each people or group maintains an historic standard of living often differing markedly since a worker may replenish his labor power by consuming meat, fish, wheat, milk, beer, and vegetables, etc., or by consuming beans, bananas, and water. Within certain limits the workers’ living standards can be driven lower and lower and yet suffice to replenish the lost labor power expended in the production process. The worker must be eternally vigilant to defend his historic standards.

 Corporate profits can either be distributed as dividends, bonuses, and other payments, or may be ploughed back into the business either first accumulated as a hoard, or spent directly on re-investment. We should not let the production capitalists shift their costs on to the general public.  Workers must continue to ensure the burden of taxation falls onto the wealthy classes and does not adversely affecting the workers’ cost of living.

Wages paid workers theoretically have to cover periods of no work funds have now also been established as a permanent compulsory savings fund for old age, disability. This fund, for the most part, again is collected by business companies as part of the cost of doing business, although here not only the employer but the employee is taxed as well. The employee is never trusted to pay the bulk of the tax; the employer does it for the worker as agent of the State.

But how can the worker be taxed if his pay covers only the bare minimum for his immediate expenses? The obvious answer is that the tax can be levied and collected because the worker has already received as wages a sum sufficient to cover this tax. What the employer has given with one hand he has been very careful to take immediately back again with the other hand as agent of the State. But why all this indirection? Would it not be simpler and better were the tax levied directly on the employer and no wages increased? Let us look at the reasons  behind this indirect procedure.

In the first place, in most cases the relation between pay increases and taxation is not a simple mechanical one. The State does not decide to tax workers and then order their agents, the employers, to increase wages so as to enable the workers to pay these taxes. In most cases the workers have been able to force the wage increases first, due to favorable circumstances and struggle. It is possible for workers to increase their real wages because the economy of their country is strong and prosperous and stands in a monopolistic or imperialistic position in the world earning super-profits for employers. It is possible for workers to have strong and militant unions to threaten the employers with dire action unless wage increases are forthcoming. Employers may be attacked individually, not collectively, and in some cases may be too weak to stand the struggle of a powerful working force leveled against them. Now with such real pay increases the workers are able to pay the tax especially needed as a compulsory national insurance savings fund for old age security. At the same time their income is reduced and the power of the employer, especially as agent of the State, is reinforced.

Secondly, by first increasing the nominal pay to the worker and then taxing that increase away the State and capitalism give certain illusions to the worker: that he is the recipient of real wage raises and to some degree a property owner, and that as property owner he is like all other property owners paying taxes to a State that acts in his behalf. The State now is partly his State and he must eschew all thoughts that the State is his deadly enemy controlled only by enemy classes. He can be induced to take part in the large number of taxation struggles and make them a decisive part of his political activity, rather than concentrating on the employer.

Taxes levied directly on business would be considered part of overhead expenses and reduce net profits accordingly, other things being equal. Taxation on the payroll however, forcing an increase in the payroll to meet the charge of taxes, causes an increase in the cost of production upon which the average rate of profits is to be calculated, other things being equal. Such a tax thus may increase prices and profits. Taxation thus has a great influence on the price and profit structures. It must be said that the workers have not opposed these “transfer” taxes, in fact they demand a greater unemployment compensation tax on employers so that they can receive full pay for the entire period of their unemployment. It is different with taxes levied for social security and medicare. Here the working class wants the whole tax paid by the employers. Also the working class violently objects to the mass of fraud and corruption, the inefficiency and waste by which the tax funds are dissipated, with cheating employers and professionals ripping off billions of dollars annually and workers deprived of the adequate care they need and expect.

Some taxes are hidden in prices. Excise duty on fuel, alcohol and tobacco, for instance. Then there is VAT (or purchase tax or sales tax) on particular goods.  This is the principle tax on consumers,  levied through retailers on the consumer when sales are made. Here it is the merchant who is the agent of the State, who collects the tax and must turn it over to the authorities. If such a tax is on luxury, the working class is little concerned  If the tax is on necessities which raise the cost of living, it is a blow at the sufficiency of the wage structure and the historic standard of living. This might bring protests on whose backs the regressive tax falls most heavily. The workers try to shift the burden of the sales tax on to the employer by securing compensation cost of living wage increases; but generally the cost of living rises first and the wage levels rise belatedly after. If the workers have developed a pay scale already higher than adequate to meet the costs of replenishing their labour power, then the sales tax is an act by the State to strip the workers down to that minimum level which the employers by themselves were not able to do. Again the State comes in to help the employer while a good part of the sales taxes goes for purposes to favour employers objectives.

 Consumer taxes abound and large sections of the unemployed or poor cannot shift these consumer taxes on to the employer. They can only demand a belated relief by increases the in unemployment, sickness or pension benefits which can be won only with the help of the working class also adversely affected.

Food for thought

An Socialist Party od Canada member's wife works at the Food Bank. To quote, " One lady came in, she was wearing very good clothes, very nice make-up and was very attractive, professional looking. After I had finished helping her with choosing food, she started to cry. She was embarrassed about having to go to a Food Bank. Possibly she had lost her job, probably a good one, and had to resort to this." Not only does capitalism create insecurity, but it can be damn humiliating. John Ayers

Independence without independence!

Aince there was a king, wha sat 
Scrievin’ this edict in his palace haa’ 
Til all his folk: ‘Vassals, I tell ye flat 
That I am I, and ye are bugger-aa’.
Robert Garioch, 

Common Weal is an old term meaning "shared wealth," but in todays political parliance it means policies aimed  to abolish poverty in Scotland through higher pay, higher taxes, and a beefed-up welfare state based on the policies of Scandanavian countries, particularly promoted by  Radical Independence Campaign (RIC), a loose coalition of Scottish left-wingers, environmentalists,  militant trade unionists, republicans, and veterans of the anti-nuclear and anti-war movements.

 The RIC’s basic  belief is that the Scottish worker is more radical than his English counter-part. But being anti-Tory doesn’t necessary correspond to being more socialist.  Yet many of workers’ struggles in Scotland and England have been linked together and the victory of each often depends on the other.  The Scottish, Welsh and English working class have not developed separately but, because of capitalism, have developed as part of one united working class. Independence may rupture the united British working class movement at trade union level. Scottish independence would disrupt the unity of the working class fueling the myths of national brotherhood between exploiters and exploited.  In reality, a socialist transformation of Scotland could only take place in a British ( European and world) context. Mass movements would take place also in Wolverhampton and Walsall, as well as in Glasgow and Greenock. A socialist transformation would be on a world scale. There is no Scottish road to socialism. For there can be no socialist Scotland, socialism is global or it is not socialism. The Scottish working class is exploited in the same way as the English working class: by the English, Scottish and international capitalist class. The bosses organises internationally and they want to ensure our class doesn’t do the same.

The SNP are a capitalist party, orientated towards the EU, who have tactically positioned themselves to the left of Labour as defending the interests of Scotland against the Tories, with high profile signature policies such as free prescriptions and care for the elderly. The largest force outside Labour and the SNP is the Scottish Green Party, which is explicitly anti-cuts and anti-NATO, with two MSPs and 4.4 per cent of the vote in 2011. The combined vote of SLP, SSP, and Solidarity in 2011 was 1.62 per cent. These left  nationalists offer a fake veneer in an effort to sell a capitalist and nationalist agenda as some ill-defined step towards a Scottish “socialist republic”. With the domination of capital in Scotland as throughout the world, such a solution would not offer true autonomy. The independence put forward by the SNP is one which includes the Queen as head of state, retaining the pound sterling, British military bases to remain as well as continued membership of NATO and the continuance of the BBC as the mouthpiece o the ruling class.

Independence would offer no way out under capitalism and would only serve to foster divisions in the working class.  On the basis of continued capitalism in Scotland and the rest of Britain, Scottish and English workers would be placed in direct competition. This is especially true if we consider SNP plans for a more “business friendly” environment, with lower corporation tax and other incentives, in an attempt to encourage businesses to relocate from England to Scotland. The whole approach would be to drive down costs, i.e., wage to become more competitive. They would encourage a race to the bottom and pit worker against worker. Such competition between Scottish and UK businesses would result in a driving down of wages on both sides of the border. Such competition between Scottish and UK businesses would result in a driving down of wages on both sides of the border. A loss of jobs or fall in wages would also be used by the British ruling class to stoke up resentment south of the border, and vice versa.  England would dominate the Scottish economy. The ownership of Scotland’s economy, including its banks and trade, will still  be controlled from the City of London. Scotland would still be at the whims of international capital.

A recent study by the Centre for Public Policy for Regions (CPPR), a Glasgow University-based think tank, has underscored that the biggest cuts in day-to-day spending on public services will come in 2016-17 and 2017-18. Only half of the intended austerity measures have been implemented in Scotland, and most of these have been made at the expense of capital spending. Writing in the Scotsman, CPPR economist John McLaren dismissed the claim that Scotland would be insulated from spending cuts by independence. This “ignores the reality that, in practice, similar fiscal circumstances are almost bound to exist for an independent Scotland, and so greater clarity would also be needed in terms of a medium-term to long-term budgeting strategy, with or without any oil fund.”

The task before workers in Scotland and the UK is to join in struggle against their common enemy, whether they wave the Union flag or the Saltire. The overriding goal is not to build new, smaller states but to end the nation state system through social revolution. We stand for the overthrow of capitalism and a  precondition for this is the unity of the working class in this common struggle for socialism.  Nationalism is on the rise in Europe with the strengthening of  Fortress Europe as well as a rise in the far right within member states.

 All nationalisms are based upon sweet seductive fairy tales about the great destiny of this that or the other people, their historic unity and the beautiful landscapes that surround them.  We want unity and friendship – but with all the peoples of the world. We are stirred by our history and natural beauty – but by the history of our class and natural beauty of all countries, not just our own. We have to resist the ideology of nationalism. Every effort is put forth by the exploiting capitalist to prevent workers from seeing the class struggle. The Scottish bosses insists that there is no such struggle, just the national interest. The hired editors in the employ of the capitalist echoes “no class struggle.” The academics dependent upon the capitalist for the chance to make a living, agree that there are no classes and no class struggle. In unison they declaim against class agitation and seek to obscure class rule that it may be perperuated indefinitely. We insist that there is a class struggle; that the working class must recognise it; that they must organise economically and politically upon the basis of that struggle; and that when they do so organise they will then have the power to free themselves and put an end to that struggle forever.

Who owns the North Pole - Part 67

While many existing oil and gas reserves in other parts of the world are facing steep decline, the Arctic is thought to possess vast untapped reservoirs. Approximately 13 percent of the world’s undiscovered oil deposits and 30 percent of its natural gas reserves are above the Arctic Circle, according to the United States Geological Survey. Eager to tap into this largess, Russia and its Arctic neighbors — Canada, Norway, the United States, Iceland and Denmark (by virtue of its authority over Greenland) — have encouraged energy companies to drill in the region.

 Arctic drilling poses an unacceptable threat to the region. Any major spill that occurs there is likely to prove far more destructive than the one produced in the Gulf of Mexico by the Deepwater Horizon disaster in April 2010, because of both the lack of adequate response capabilities and the likelihood that ice floes and sea ice will impede cleanup operations. As more companies push into the Arctic and accelerate their operations there, the risk of accidents and spills is bound to increase.

The risk of conflict over the ownership of contested territories is likely to grow. Five of the Arctic states have asserted exclusive drilling rights to boundary areas also claimed by one of the others, and control over the polar region itself remains contentious. In an area with the “potential for tapping what may be as much as a quarter of the planet’s undiscovered oil and gas,” Secretary of Defense Chuck Hagel warned recently, “a flood of interest in energy exploration has the potential to heighten tensions over other issues.”

Most of the Arctic states have asserted their right to defend their offshore territories with force and have taken steps to enhance their ability to fight in these areas. Russia, for example, recently announced plans to establish what it calls a “cutting-edge military infrastructure” in the Arctic.

Another  big danger in Arctic drilling is posed by the release of mass amounts of Methane gas trapped under the permafrost. Enough gas will be released into the atmosphere to kill all life on the planet.

None of this, however, is likely to deter other interested countries. With the demand for oil at an all-time high and existing fields incapable of satisfying global needs, the major energy firms are bound to pursue every conceivable source of supply.

No extra measure of oil and natural gas is worth the destruction of pristine wilderness or the onset of an Arctic arms race but capitalism will not stop its expansion.  What do they care about wildnerness? All they see is money and power, power and money. The capitalist’s greed  always trumps common sense. Rushing for profits and greater ownership is what world capital interests seek above all else.

From here 

The Fair Wage - A Mythic Dream

All the wage increases over the past 15 years have gone to the wealthiest 10%, according to the Economic Policy Institute. All of them. And almost all, 95%, of the income gains from 2009 to 2012, the first three years of recovery from the Great Recession, went to the very richest 1%.

The minimum wage has not risen since 2009 -. If the minimum wage had just kept pace with inflation since 1968, it would be $10.77 an hour today instead of $7.25. If the minimum wage had kept up with the growth of workers' productivity, it would be $18.67. And if it had matched the wage growth of the wealthiest 1%, it would be more than $28. For tipped workers, the minimum wage rate has been stuck at a scandalous $2.13 for 20 years. A raise in the minimum wage would give 30 million workers a little more money to pay for rent, food and other needs.

The median household income in the USA is about $50,000. The average household size is about 2.59 people. $50,000/2.59 is about $19,300. Assume a 2000 hour work year. Then you have $19,300/2000 hours equals $9.65 per hour. Based on these simple and fact-based calculations above, the bare minimum living wage is $9.65 per hour if you work full-time. Face the facts my friends. Even if you work full time at $9.65 per hour, you are still pretty poor.

The share of workers in "good” jobs -- paying more than $37,000 a year and providing health care and retirement benefits -- has fallen, even though workers' average age and education level have grown. And today, most job growth -- and six in 10 jobs expected to be added over the next decade -- are in low-wage fields.

Under no circumstances can a wage be fair. It is a common delusion that wages are a payment for work done. If they were this, then to the worker would go the full market price of his product. To the miner would go the full selling price of the coal less only the cost of maintaining the railwaymen, transport workers and others incidental to the transfer of coal from pit to power station . To the engineer would go the price of his product—to the agricultural labourer his. To the worker would go the whole produce of his toil, and there would be none left for profits or dividends. It is clear, then, that the wage of the worker is a part, and only a part, of his own product. Any “wage” bring only a part, is an injustice—an unfairness—to those whose labour has begotten the whole. Anything fair to the worker as producer would be unfair to the “employer . From the nature of the relation, employer and employee, there can be no such thing as “fairness” about the reward of the latter.

It is often suggested nowadays that the wage should be governed by the “cost of living” - the living wage.  One has only to ask the meaning of “living” in this connection to expose its fallacy. If  worker accepts this as a principle, they lay themselves open to all the old attacks upon their lifestyle -  extravagance, wastefulness, drunkenness.

The Citizens Wage 

Those who are not into radical politics, the basic income is an income granted unconditionally to all citizens (or inhabitants) - Citizens income or universal benefit,

Promotion of the concept of social wage invariably means arguing against fighting for pay rises, and is based on the assumption that class struggle is a bad thing; better to use the democratic process to elect social democrats to government and legislate improvements in the social wage.

“Social wage” fell out of use in the latter part of the 20th century, as social democratic parties around the world were engaged in running down health services and pensions while unions were bargaining for employer contributions to health insurance and superannuation funds.

“If workers do not only want to survive, but also want a car or a holiday abroad, it will become difficult to put pressure on employers. It is clear that trade unions will lose much of their power. The freedom not to work is very relative and is only valid when one is satisfied with a life in relative poverty. Chances are real that wages above the BI will remain very limited. An unconditional income outside of the labour market cannot influence that labour market. Contrary to the thesis that capitalism is being eroded, it is possible that one ends up with a capitalism without a labour market and that employers pass on as many costs as possible to the whole of society. It makes labour more cheap, without allowing to eradicate poverty.” said one critic

A "Citizen's Income", is defined as: "a monetary payment distributed at regular intervals to all those who enjoy citizenship and residency for a certain period of time, which allows a minimum dignity of life . . . It is paid to those of working age, for the period that goes from the end of obligatory schooling to pension age or death."

Negri supports this as he sees the demand for it as "a refusal of work and of the wage relationship". If introduced other than as some tinkering with the tax and benefits system it would indeed undermine the economic compulsion to go out and work for an employer; which of course (apart from its cost) is why it is never going to happen under capitalism. In any event, as a goal, it is a poor substitute for "from each according to their ability, to each according to their needs".

His answer is, perhaps surprisingly from someone who was associated with Militant for a while, “yes”, in the form of the scheme proposed by the Belgian social thinker, Philippe Van Parijs, for paying everyone a Basic Income as of right and irrespective of whether or not they work, referring to an article by him in a book with the revealing title of Redesigning Distribution: Basic Income and Stakeholder Grants as Designs for a More Egalitarian Capitalism. Or, as Van Parijs himself has put it:

“In classical Marxism, socialism is just an instrument for achieving the society in which people can work freely according to their abilities but still get enough according to their needs. If socialism doesn’t work, because of threats to freedom and problems of dynamic efficiency, then why not harness capitalism to achieve the same objectives?” (The Bulletin, Brussels, 19 July 2001).

It’s a pipedream of course and a bit currency cranky (though to give Van Parijs his due, he did come up with a brilliant title for one of his books in What’s Wrong with a Free Lunch?). A Basic Income paid as of right would have to be funded (even squeezed) out of profits and would either undermine the wages system (why work for a capitalist employer if the State is paying you whether you work or not?) or make no difference (since wages would fall by the amount of the State wage subsidy that a Basic Income would represent). Or it would be fixed at so low a level as to be just another name for “Income Support”.

land backed interest free currency –spent into the economy to create infrastructure, rental income to fund citizens income and public services.’

In other words, the government would get money by taxing away the rental income, real or notional, of landowners (which these days includes not just the Duke of Westminster but those who own the leasehold or freehold of their homes) and using this to pay everybody a basic income as well as to finance its own expenditure. It is not clear that this is actually an ‘alternative currency’ since the existence of rental incomes to be taxed away assumes that there already is a currency. What they seem to mean is ‘land based interest free government financing,’ which would allow the government to dispense with borrowing money.

Let it never be forgotten that a  basic income guarantee is always perfectly compatible with alienation and oppression.

Fact of the Day

While the brewers and distillers pocket the profits,  alcohol is killing the equivalent of 20 people a week and 700 hospital admissions per week in Scotland.

http://www.bbc.co.uk/news/uk-scotland-25283838

POVERTY STRICKEN MILLIONS

'More working households were living in poverty in the UK last year than non-working ones - for the first time, a charity has reported. Just over half of the 13 million people in poverty - surviving on less than 60% of the national median (middle) income - were from working families, it said. The Joseph Rowntree Foundation said low pay and part-time work had prompted an unprecedented fall in living standards.' (BBC News, 8 December) These figures  underestimate the extent of the problem as the JRF's annual Monitoring Poverty and Social Exclusion report was written by the New Policy Institute and tracks a range of indicators, including government data and surveys covering income, education and social security, and has a very frugal concept of what poverty is. In the 2011-12 period, the amount of earnings before a household was said to be in poverty was £128 a week for a single adult; £172 for a single parent with one child; £220 for a couple with no children, and £357 for a couple with two children. How many of the "we are all in this together" MPs could survive on £128 a week? RD

An alien world

Imagine a being from Outer Space visiting Earth. The alien would observe our scientific, technological and medical achievements, but would then notice the plight of billions with no access to these accomplishments. Then s/he/it would notice a small minority of Earthlings who are not only indifferent to this suffering but directly benefit from it.

The number of wealthy individuals in the world has reached 10.9 million - more than existed before the 2008 banking crises. Their collective wealth, $42.7 trillion, has also topped the levels it reached in 2007, before the crash and recession. This elite group represents 0.15% of a world population of over 7 billion. The super-rich were hiding at least $21 trillion in tax havens at the end of 2010. This is an underestimate and could well be as high as $32 trillion.  Oxfam estimates that  $7.18 trillion - is sitting in accounts in British Overseas Territories and Crown Dependencies.

The above wealth exists in a world where 870 million people were suffering from chronic undernourishment in 2010-2012, 16 million of whom were in the developed world.   Poor nutrition plays a role in at least 5 million deaths of children each year. Additionally, more than 3.4 million people die each year from water, sanitation, and hygiene-related causes.

The alien being would also notice all the resources used to patch up this broken system. The social work profession is in charge of administering the minimal resources provided by the state to smooth over the sharpest edges of  capitalism. Profit maximisation is the fundamental principle of capitalism. Social work operates within the dictates of a ruling class who sees the protection and expansion of profit, and thus the exploitation of humanity, as the primary objective.

Capitalist development forges a working class out of conditions of suffering and deprivation. Homelessness, poverty, mental illness, hunger, and other social ills are inevitable machinations of the capitalist system. Social workers are hired by the state and/or ‘non-profit’ private enterprises to stabilise capitalist exploitation. Capital employs social workers to provide mental health, addiction counseling, and case management services. These services address the social ills of capitalism without challenging the profit motive or the entrenched principle of private property that creates inequality in the first place. Social workers work toward the “stabilisation”  rather then the “liberation” of masses of people from the exploitation of man by man. Social workers manage exploitation rather then challenge it. The social work values of self-determination, empowerment, and dignity are empty rhetoric in the midst of a capitalist political economy that plunders the world at the enrichment of the few.

The great economic power of the world is the product of the labour of countless people in this land and around the globe. But while the working people created this wealth, they do not own or control it. The capitalist system has concentrated the ownership of the tremendous productive forces in the hands of a small group of big capitalists. Workers are wage slaves who survive only by selling their labour power to the capitalists. Capitalists own the means of production and pay workers for their labour power. But the working class produces far more wealth than it receives in income. The difference is the source of capitalist profits. The worker is employed only as long as he or she helps create profit. When the capitalist has problems maximizing his profits, he does not hesitate to throw workers out into the street. The capitalist system exploits the working class and creates the poverty and economic insecurity of society as a whole.

The capitalist system is a system of economic anarchy and crisis. Capitalism is plagued by periodic economic crises, such as recessions, which are becoming more serious and complex. These crises are built into the economic system. Each capitalist enterprise tries to profit in the short run, but because of this competition the economy is thrown into turmoil.

The system of capitalism wastes a great amount of social wealth. Even technological advances often are delayed or even suppressed due to profit considerations. And when technological innovations such as “industrial robots” are introduced, they are at the expense of workers who are discharged from their jobs. The colossal development of capitalism in the post-war years is evident enough. The rapid growth of technology, the electronic and informational revolution in the recent decades, the unprecedented expansion of the application of robots and computerised systems in production and distribution point to the this development.

There is a hoary old argument that ‘in any society someone has to do the nasty jobs’. New technology raises the very real possibility of a society in which robots would do all the nasty jobs. Technology could do away with toil and tedium of much work for ever. They could produce a society in which mining accidents only ‘maimed’ robot miners; in which clerical workers turned into the office for only a couple of hours a day and engaged in leisure pursuits while machines did the rest; in which shift-work was unknown except for a very narrow range of occupations like nursing and firefighting; in which the tedium of the assembly line was a nightmare from the past; in which even the handicaps associated with natural afflictions like deafness and blindness were overcome.

The vast array of communications technology that is becoming available could provide a ready means by which those who produce the wealth could democratically adjudge how it should be used, with the information about what different alternatives would mean literally at their finger tips. The final death blow would be dealt to the claim that somehow human beings are  incapable of obtaining the information needed to make rational decisions as to how to use resources to satisfy their material needs.

Nowhere in Marx’s writings is there to be found a detailed account of the new social system which was to follow capitalism. Marx wrote no “Utopia”. The terms “socialism” and “communism” are used more or less interchangeably The first essential feature of socialism is that the of production are taken from private ownership and used for society as, a whole.  The objective  is classless society. The people as a whole own the means of production (factories, mines, etc.). Production is for people’s use, not for  profit. The principle of the operation is “from each according to his ability, to each according to his needs”. Production is of such a high level that there are abundant commodities for every member of the community and each member helps him or herself according to his or her needs.

Computers, automation and robotics are making it possible to build a new world, a world in which the robots do the “work” and people set about the task of culturally and socially enriching their lives.

Food for thought

According to Toronto Star business writer, David Olive (November 23), we should all be very grateful for the handouts the super rich give us. So many have given large donations to hospitals, concert halls libraries and the like. Besides, the obscene gap between the rich and the rest of us is not the cause of our poverty (relative or absolute). "That abomination owes chiefly to insensitive governments". Gee, and I thought it was because the wealth that society produces is distributed in favour of the rich because they own the means of producing and distributing wealth and therefore we get less precisely because they get more. John Ayers

We have no country - We have a world to win

For a socialist world! To this inspiring task, we summon the workers of all lands – all who are oppressed by capitalism. Only a socialist world can give us peace and plenty. Look how the capitalist world totters on the brink of destruction and possible extinction of the human race.

Yes, prosperity has returned for the bankers, the corporations, the stock exchange speculators. Quantitative Easing has rescued their investments and restored their profits. But the great masses of the people continue to suffer from austerity cuts. The two capitalist parties, Tory (with their coalition partner) and Labour are as rotten and bankrupt as the system they uphold. They pile additional burdens upon the people. For the future they offer only continued misery and insecurity.

Long ago, spokesmen for royalism and the aristocracy argued that common people were unfit to be entrusted with affairs of state. The same sort of elitist prejudice motivates some of those even today. If the workers can produce machinery and precision instruments for the industry and all kinds of commodities for the market, if they can build and maintain powerful trade unions for themselves, why can’t they go beyond all that? What prevents them from organising a mass political party of their own, being won over to socialist ideas, and eventually manning a revolutionary movement which can challenge the existing order and show the way to a new society? Why can’t these workers, who make the necessities and luxuries of life, also make history and remake society and, in the process, remake themselves?

 The Socialist Party of Great Britain do not believe that the people can be summoned into battle on anyone’s command. The class struggle unfolds at its own speed and direction. On the other hand, we are neither fatalists or historical determinists

The  evils of capitalism will disappear only with the destruction of capitalism and the building of socialism. The intensity of the class struggle is greater today and now it is time for the working class to overthrow capitalism. Today it is the ballot box that we use against capitalism. Struggle for socialism. Support the Socialist Party, the only party that keeps the revolutionary red banner unfurled. 

Food for thought

You have to hand it to those capitalists. It only took numerous deadly workplace fires, a building collapse killing over one thousand, conditions of work right out of the nineteenth century, but they have come through with an eighty per cent raise for the Bangladeshi garment workers. They now earn the grand sum of C$72 per month. The capitalists' generosity knows no bounds! John Ayers.

Reformers and betrayers

Capitalism has brought the technology and the organisation of production to a point where the potential to adequately feed, clothe and house the entire world population is reachable. But the creation of abundance would end exploitation and destroy profits, so the capitalists themselves stand as a barrier to a society fit for human beings. Socialist revolution is the only solution. The very elements of socialism, however, are being forgotten by many people in the workers movement to-day. At the moment the idea is being widely spread that by an improvement in the efficiency of capitalism the workers will be able to obtain a continuous improvement in their standard of life. The idea behind this is that the more capitalism produces wealth the better off everyone will become. This is not the case.

 At the present moment the difficulties of capitalism are increasing in every country. One of the sharpest divisions of opinion existing in the Labour movement to-day is that concerning the attitude which ought to be adopted towards this capitalist attack on the wages and conditions of the working class. The reformist leaders of the Labour Party hold that capitalism is not in a “normal” condition. If wage reductions will help in getting capitalism back to “normal,” then they hold that these wage reductions ought to be agreed to by the working class. We see that this policy of calling upon the workers to make sacrifices in order to help capitalism back to normal, runs through the whole policy of the Labour Party.

Socialists contend, on the other hand, that the recessions of the capitalist system is not due to some abnormal accident which has befallen capitalism. The Socialist Party call upon the workers to resist all attempts to lower their standard of life, to unite their forces industrially and to make their resistance as widespread and as united as possible, and to go forward from that to an attack on the capitalist system itself. The more the workers unite their forces and commence to struggle against the capitalist offensive, the more the struggle becomes a political struggle, not between the workers and any group of capitalists, but between the workers and the capitalist state representing the capitalist class as a whole. If the  working-class desire to beat off the capitalist attacks on their present standards and carry out a resolute struggle to achieve their emancipation through the overflow of capitalism, they must fight more and more against any reformist policy of co-operating with capitalism. All workers who are tired of the half-heartedness and compromise of the Left, their co-operation with the capitalist class, should join the Socialist Party and help forward the struggle for complete working class emancipation.

Too many times we have had men who serve the ruling class and who get a good living keeping the working class divided. They start out with good intentions often as not. They really want to do something to serve their fellows. They leave the factory-floor as a common worker, elected to be officers of a union and they change their clothes from overalls and dungarees to a tie, white shirt and suit. They change their habits and their methods. After they have been elevated to official position, as if by magic, they are recognised by those who previously scorned them and held them in contempt. They find that some of the doors that were previously barred against them now open, and they can actually get their feet under the desk of the company chairman.  Our common worker is now a union leader and the employer pats him on the back and tells him that he knew long ago that he was a coming man, that it was a fortunate thing for the workers of the world that he had been born, that in fact they had been long waiting for just such a wise and cautious general secretary. And this has a certain effect upon our new-made leader, and unconsciously, perhaps, he begins to change. Thus goes the transformation. All his dislikes disappear and all feeling of antagonism vanishes. He concludes that they are really most excellent people and, now that he has seen and knows them, he agrees with them that there is no necessary conflict between employer and employee. And he proceeds to betray the class that trusted him and lifted him as high above themselves. Newspapers write editorials about him and praise him as a wise leader; and the CBI and Chambers of Commerce emphasise  that if all union leaders were such as he there would be no objection to labour organising.  The trade unionist who is held in high favour by management is pronounced safe, reliable and honest, and the workers are appealed to to look to him for advice, for guidance and leadership. And the union leader feels himself flattered. And when he is charged with having deserted the class he was supposed to serve, he cries out that the indictment is brought to discredit him but it is those who brings the charge who are most likely to be defamed. By whom? By the capitalist class, of course; and its press and “public” opinion.

A trade union leader who is not attacked  by the capitalist class is not true to the working class. If he be loyal to the working class he will not be on friendly terms with the bosses. He cannot serve both. When he really serves one he serves that one against the other.

The only way in which Trade Union leaders can cooperate with the capitalists is restoring “prosperity” (i.e., increasing production) is to induce the workers to forgo their customs and restrictions, allow the capitalists a freer hand in utilising the labour-power which is available to them in order that an increased product may result. The Trade Union leaders will, of course, point out to the capitalists that this increased production requires to be marketed, and that the employers ought to ensure a stable home market by increasing the workers’ wages as fast, if not faster, than the increased production. They forget the employing class is anxious to introduce those new methods because of a desire for a greater profit, and is not concerned with ensuring a market for his goods through the increase of wages and the reduction of his own profits, and therefore he looks not to a home market made prosperous by the increase in workers’ wages, but to the foreign market where he can rely on a maximum possible profit. Union leaders will, of course, point out to the capitalists that this increased production requires to be marketed, and that the employers ought to ensure a stable home market by increasing the workers’ wages as fast, if not faster, than the increased production. They forget the employing class is anxious to introduce those new methods because of a desire for a greater profit, and is not concerned with ensuring a market for his goods through the increase of wages and the reduction of his own profits, and therefore he looks not to a home market made prosperous by the increase in workers’ wages, but to the foreign market where he can rely on a maximum possible profit.  Union leaders who are leading the workers to believe that a far-reaching improvement in the workers’ wages and conditions of life can be got not by overthrowing capitalism, but by co-operating with the capitalists to make their system more efficient, are simply surrendering to the capitalist class, misleading the workers, and creating conditions which will inevitably make the rich richer and the workers poorer.

Scotland needs more immigrants

Scotland’s ageing population will struggle without the help of younger immigrants from other European countries. The Scotland of the future will need more immigrants. This is going to be true regardless whether an independent country or not. Scotland has a workforce which is ageing. Before long, the need to pay for the ever growing numbers no longer working by the efforts of the shrunken proportion still working will become a big social problem.

One answer would be a greater rate of increase in the native population, though it is hard to see how the long-term trend towards smaller families can be halted. Another answer is that emigration  could be diminished though that again seems unlikely to happen. Another alternative would be to increase participation in economic activity by people such as young mums or OAPS. The white paper on Scotland’s future proposed a scheme of childcare is presented as a social measure but its real rationale was economic.

 These measures, even in combination, would have more than a minor effect on the age-profile of the population and so of the workforce. The only thing that can change that reasonably quickly is immigration.  At the turn of the 21st century the population of Scotland was stagnating in the way it had been for most of the 20th century. The total hovered just above five million, but threatened soon to plunge below that level and to carry on down. Only a few years later and we find not just that the population has kept above five million but also that it continues to rise and within a couple of decades is forecast to reach 5.7 million, the highest number that has ever lived in Scotland in the whole of its history. Immigration is what has made the difference. If we needed to rely only on the natural rate of increase, that is, the excess of native births over native deaths, then the population would still be stagnating, if not falling.

Adapted from here

HARSH REALITY

British MPs like to pat themselves on the back and boast about improving living standards, but recent information from official sources paints a completely different picture. 'Food poverty in the UK has now become such a big problem that it should be seen as a "public health emergency", a group of health experts says. In a letter to the British Medical Journal, six leading public health figures warned poor nutrition could lead to a host of problems. It comes amid reports that people are struggling to feed themselves. The UK Red Cross has started asking for food donations for the first time since World War Two. And in October the Trussell Trust, which runs 400 food banks, said the numbers of people it was helping had tripled to 350,000 in the past year.' (BBC News, 4 December) Poor nutrition for thousands of workers in one of the most developed capitalist countries in the world despite politicians boasts is the harsh reality of the profit motive society. RD

The Bank Revolution?

You have been taught that we live in a democracy. There are laws and courts and jails for the criminals — and you were told that all citizens are equal before the law. But you know perfectly well that a banker who swindles a great many people seldom lands in jail, and if he does, he is soon pardoned or else his imprisonment is turned into something like a vacation in a country club open prison. But if you, a worker, steals the law will be after you and there will be no mercy. You were taught that this is “justice.” Yet where is the justice to  being thrown out into the street for non-payment of a mortage or rent but bankers an default on billions and get bail-outs from the government? Something is wrong here, too. Apparently, all these notions about law and order, about justice and injustice, about crime and punishment, are made in the interests, not of you and the like of you, but in the interests of those who use them against you.

The truth of the matter is that this is a rich man’s State and a rich man’s government. The State is there to act on behalf of finance capital and to protect its interests against the people. The government is the executive committee of business.

 Bankers and brokers, hedge fund managers, real estate speculators— they do not produce anything essential to human life although they have the lion’s share of control over production. As a matter of fact, they produce nothing. They transfer “paper” from hand to hand. That paper — call it checks or deeds or shares — is a claim to the fruits of somebody else’s labour. Wall Street and the City of London were doing its bit. Wall Street is the popular name for the greatest combination of financial manipulators, and it was boosting stock prices sky high. The price of stocks is based upon the estimated earning capacity of the unit that issues the stocks. This earning capacity was declared by the advocates of Wall Street to be unlimited. Prosperity was to go up and up in an unending spiral. The big sharks of the stock exchange were making billions. The fat cats of Wall Street were having the time of their lives. Everybody praised the glory of the market. The structure was built on sand. The crash came. It was inevitable. Stocks tumbled down. Capitalist propagandists asserted that it was only a violent “downward readjustment.” It was more than that. It was a disaster.

They wish us to  believe it was just an accident, or at worse, the malpractice of a few out of control individuals yet the business corporations were garnering in the profits and issuing out the rewards to their executives in huge bonuses and stock options. Then with the recession  they complained of hard times and although not  a single chairman of the board of directors of the large corporations went begging in the streets they held out their hands for alms from the government - and got it . Whereas the wages of the  workers were cut mercilessly and the benefits for unemployed turned them into  beggars at food-banks and charities. Big business is now  prosperous again, the hic-cup in the past but still  the working class is suffering great hardships.

Is this all an accident? It is not. It is the outcome of a system where wealth is owned, not by those who produce it, but by those who do not produce anything, who have amassed it out of the work of others under the protection of the law; a system where production is directed, not towards satisfying human wants, but towards making profits for the owners of wealth; a system where the primary purpose of labor — to satisfy the basic needs of humanity — is completely lost sight of in the scramble for fatter investments fortunes. Society rests on the foundation of labour, no matter what its form.

But lessons of the recession must be learned. Plan after plan is being tossed about in the think-tanks and academia to restore confidence in their economic theories. The importance to capitalism of a sound financial system cannot be underestimated. It is for that reason that they have been so quick to apply any remedies that they hope may relieve any imperfections. To the millions of workers, the government refuses the slightest aid. But to the financial oligarchy it is prepared to lend its entire machinery.  The government is always ready to help those who do not need it – those who do, the working class, will have to wrench it from them in the course of the struggle against capitalism.

For a long time it was believed that dislocations of monetary and credit systems, commonly observed during depressions, were at the bottom of the whole trouble. There followed all sorts of theories on and manipulations with currency emission, bank and credit regulations, etc., including the setting up of government controls, such as the Federal Reserve System. It was overlooked that disturbances of the fiscal structure, stringency of money and credit and panics were primarily the effect and not the cause of convulsions. It was also ignored that crises erupted in times when credit was easy as well as when it was tight. Now the Fed is viewed as the main culprit by many now in the Tea Party and Randist wing of the right. Economic crises always have a falling-out-among-thieves side to them, as different capital sectors seek long-term advantage for themselves in the working out of capitalism’s common problems.

The SPGB task is explaining the real crisis of capitalism.

Food Bank Poverty

Hungry Fifers are going without food for days as times get tougher for low earners. One woman turned up at Dunfermline Foodbank having had nothing to eat for two days. Alarmingly, around half of the people who turn up looking for help cannot afford food despite being in employment.
John Drylie, who runs the foodbank said “About 50% of the people we are dealing with at the foodbank are on low wages, which is quite a concern. They’re not making ends meet. For low wage earners, something like a big bill is enough to put them back. We are finding that they are making sure the kids have something to eat but they are going without.

A new Kirkcaldy foodbank has been launched, as the town faces poverty “of an unbelievable scale”.
“The opening comes as one local Fife charity has predicted ‘the worst year yet’ for poor families, with many needing help just to survive and dreading Christmas this year as a result of benefit changes and the spiralling cost of food and fuel. Years ago, a Christmas appeal would focus on toys — the kind of presents those families struggling to make ends meet could enjoy as small extras. Now, the main emphasis in our appeals this Christmas is for basic food. Our Christmas message must be that no Government should allow the poor and vulnerable to sink so low that they cannot feed themselves.” local MP Gordon Brown, ex- Chancellor and ex-Prime minister said, oblivious to his own contribution to the situation.

The failure to establish a major foodbank project in Glenrothes could see some children go hungry on a daily basis, according to a leading community figure, Mary Hill, director of the Glenrothes YMCA-YWCA, who also said that the number of local families going hungry will only increase in the near future, as many continue to be affected by the economic climate.

Levenmouth Foodbank was launched in September as more and more people find themselves in financial crisis, compounded by the recession, benefit changes, the so-called bedroom tax and soaring energy bills. Councillor Andrew Rodger said: “It’s disgraceful in a civilised society like Britain we have foodbanks because of what is going on at UK level.”

Welfare changes have seen a 120% rise in people using the Dundee foodbank. In all, 1,958 people, including 465 children, used the charitable facility this year, compared to 887 for the same period in 2012. More than 700 of those who used the Dundee foodbank were referred by the Scottish Welfare Fund, which has halted its issuing of crisis loans. The startling figures reflect the growing use of foodbanks across Scotland, with 8,000 more people using their services around the country — a 400% increase on figures from the same period last year.

“The reality is that there is a clear link between benefit delays or changes and people turning to foodbanks, and that the situation has got worse in the last three months,” said the Trussell Trust’s executive chairman Chris Mould. “Since April’s welfare reforms we’ve seen more people referred to foodbanks because of benefit delays or changes,” he said.

The Rev David Robertson, a Free Church of Scotland minister, believes that the increased figures reflect that the Government has got its priorities wrong. “We’re not talking here about people who have just come off the street. These are people who are being referred and have a genuine need,” he said. “I think the fact that that increase in the use of the foodbank has taken place shows the real impact of the cuts...“How can they be subsidising childcare for a family on £300,000 a year while people are going hungry and being thrown out of their homes? It is the politics of privilege and the economics of madness.” 

Against the "Realists"

Thinking capitalism is good for you is like thinking a Big Mac is good for you because it has lettuce and a pickle.  In 2008, 1.9 million Portuguese workers in the private sector were covered by collective bargaining agreements. Last year, the number was down to 300,000. Spain has eased restrictions on collective layoffs and unfair dismissal, and relaxed limits on extending temporary work, allowing workers to be kept on fixed-term contracts for up to four years. Andrew Watt, an economist who heads the Macroeconomic Policy Institute in Germany, worries that the push for labor market deregulation will cascade from one weak country to the next, as all engage in a futile race to create jobs by gaining market share from one another in a world of insufficient demand. “Whichever country is weakest at the time is forced into major cutbacks. First Germany, now Spain, next France,” he said.

Inequality across much of Europe has widened. In 1991, the richest 10 percent of Germans took in 26 percent of the nation’s income before taxes and transfers. By 2010 they took in 31 percent. Over the same period, the slice of the nation’s income taken by the bottom half of the population fell to 17 percent, from 22 percent.

Too often union leaders have prided themselves on their hard-headed "realism”, their tough “practicality”, their "pragmatic" approach of looking at each problem concretely with no “abstract theories” to block their view. They want only a “fair day’s pay for a fair day’s work.” Their “reasonableness" cover their ignorance and refusal to face the facts of life. They are indeed not idealists but firm supporters of the present capitalist system. For over two hundred years capitalism has proceeded in a jerky fashion of cyclical prosperity and depression.

The essential basic feature of the capitalist mode of production is profit; the driving motivation of capitalist society must be the relentless pursuit of an ever greater rate and mass of profit. This profit is the surplus over and above what the costs of production are, the costs of the means of production and the cost of labor power. This profit is placed in the hands of the capitalist. Part of it is spent for his enjoyment; another part is divided among different groups of society or is paid in taxes. But an essential part of the profit must be reinvested in the productive process itself on an ever increasing scale. Capital must be accumulated or it will die.

The drive to increase or maintain profit or prevent their decline means that every effort must be made to reduce the costs of production, the costs of the means of production and the cost of labour power. To do this science, engineering, technology and techniques are developed as much and as speedily as possible so that mankind can produce the goods for the needs and wants of society with the least cost possible.

Every capitalist, therefore, must throw into the market all he possibly can over and above the amount he took out of the market. This surplus must grow in ever increasing and rapid amounts. If the markets do not expand accordingly, and they do not, there must come a time when the surplus cannot be marketed and a depression occurs with consequent unemployment and suffering.

The depression, however, tends to have this historic result. The less efficient methods of production are wiped out, the more efficient prevail; and when the depression ends, there is production on a far more efficient and better scale than ever. Competition and depression have forcibly destroyed what had been allowed economically to remain too long. Depressions result in intensification of both the suffering of the people and economic progress. The capitalist is no more to blame for this situation than the worker. Both are products of the same mode of production.

In all this long cyclical history of capitalism some people have arisen in the past who have tried to see whether depressions could be prevented and yet capitalism saved. Nevertheless depressions are still with us and grow ever more intense and enduring. A far greater number of noble people, especially from the ranks of the sufferers, have clamored for some relief and academics suggest all manner of policies so that the recessions can be made more gradual and not so severe, made shorter and not so prolonged, have less fearsome effects. Perhaps the suffering could be alleviated to a degree. Certainly it is an anomaly to have lines at food banks in the midst of great piles of useful commodities lying ready to be consumed or to be produced. Indeed, advanced capitalist countries have done something along this if only to prevent riots and revolutions from the suffering victims. But for the moment, taking advantage of the weaknesses in the union movement and the lack of effective resistance, the cuts and onslaught against workers will continue unabated until that union fight-back grows in strength.

Today in the Autumn Statement the Chancellor will be setting out new cuts that will see social welfare budgets curtailed even more. 

The Unpaid Over-worked "Angels"

The NHS in Scotland is close to breaking point, with most nurses claiming they are forced to work overtime to meet patient needs, a new report has found. A majority of nurses say patient care is suffering because of the pressure they are under, according to a staff survey by the Royal College of Nursing (RCN). Nurses are going unpaid for the extra hours they work because this was not agreed in advance, the report reveals, and time back in lieu cannot be taken because this would leave colleagues even more short staffed.

Nearly 2,000 nursing posts have been axed in Scotland in recent years. The survey finds that 54 per cent of nurses are working beyond their contracted hours each week in order to meet demands, with 58 per cent saying they are under too much pressure. More than half (55 per cent) say they are not providing the level of care they want to as the pressure builds. Only 38.1 per cent in Scotland say they would choose nursing as a career if they had to do it all again.

Norman Provan, of RCN Scotland, said the report must act as a “wake-up call” for NHS chiefs and the Scottish Government. “It is both unfair and unsustainable to continue to rely on the goodwill of nurses to keep health services running. It is apparent that health services are only managing to meet demand because of nurses willing to go the extra mile, for free.” he said.

Cosla Chief Condemns Constitutional Change Debate

The 25-year gap in life expectancy between Scotland’s richest and poorest neighbourhoods has been branded “unacceptable for a modern western democracy”, by the country’s council chief, COSLA president David O’Neill.

He told MSPs on Holyrood’s local Government committee today that since the Second World War inequality has grown in Scotland, as a result of “top down” approach to Government. “The gap between the haves and have-nots has increased,” he said. He compared the likely fates of a child brought up in a deprived area today, with that of a child born in a well-off area. “The kid in the latter community can expect to live well into their eighties, but the kid born into the community with high levels of deprivation, that kid will be lucky - extremely lucky - to see 60 That’s a gap in life expectancy of 25-plus years.”

“It’s not so much about what the constitutional outcome is, but what that constitutional outcome does for our communities - whether it enables people to improve their quality of life,” he added.“If you speak to local people their story is not about the workings of Holyrood or Westminster, it’s about the local services they need. It’s about libraries not about legal advice; it’s about schools not about submarines; it’s about care not about currency. These are the things that matter to people.”

Reasons not to be cheerful

Unemployment crises are as old as modern capitalism, and thus it is clear the causes and roots of unemployment lie in how capitalism works. Under capitalism goods are produced for the market, that is, they are commodities. Included in commodities is a special commodity, labour power, which is also bought and sold in the open market. The price of labour power takes the form of wages. These wages are supposed to be enough to allow the laborer to purchase the necessities of life which can reproduce the labour power lost at work.

Under capitalism there are private owners of the factories, mines and other means of production, and the mass of workers must sell their capacity to work to the capitalists for wages. However, when the workers in the factories and other places of production work for the capitalists, they produce much more value than they receive in the form of wages. This surplus value included in the whole product of the factory is the property of the capitalist and becomes his profit.

The capitalist is in business for the profit and does his best to increase the mass of profit and the rate of profit. He can do this either by winning more markets or by reducing the cost of production or by speeding up the circulation of his capital, or all these. In short, in order to increase his profit the capitalist must expand his business and produce more stuff at lower cost. To do this he must accumulate capital and reinvest part of his profits back into the business. This accumulation of capital is the basic law of capitalism. Because of it, the factories grow larger, the industries become greater, little business turns into big business in this in turn develops into huge national and international corporations.

The chief method by which the capitalist can lower the cost of his production is through cheapening the value of labour power. This is done by introducing new machinery which can enable the worker to produce an ever-increasing quantity of goods in less and less time and with the same effort. Thus the introduction of machinery which increased not only the actual production but also the productive capacity of industry had two effects: if the market did not expand as rapidly as production increased, then workers were thrown out of work. Secondly, the amount of goods that were turned over to the employer, over and above the amount set aside for wages and replacement of capital, became increasingly large and increasingly difficult for the boss to get rid of.

Hand in hand with all these methods to increase the productivity of labour went all sorts of clever schemes to speed up (that is to increase the intensity of labour) and to increase the hours of labor wherever possible. The speed-up and stretch-out system was elaborated to its highest point and labor became so condensed that the laborer was burned out in a very short time. Social welfare schemes were introduced to keep the workers docile and to break up any tendency to organisation. Many company unions were cleverly contrived to keep the discontented in a safe channel.

Added to these industrial measures were methods in the field of finance, and circulation of capital that helped capitalists scientifically to increase the rate and mass of profits. The government rushed to the aid of big business and in a thousand ways saw to it that  rivals countries’ businesses were excluded by protectionism and the maximum possible was squeezed out of the workers.

In periods of depression the "normal" waste under capitalism is tremendously increased. Half of the productive apparatus of the country is left idle, the machinery abandoned to rust or doomed to be thrown out as antiquated. Since the product is not consumed, the gap between capacity to produce and actual production so greatly increases as to threaten the very ability further to increase capacity and government aid must be given to private industry in order to prevent a complete cessation of new inventions and industrial processes that increase the capacity of the country to produce. The soil is so wastefully mishandled that we are forced to become acutely aware of this chaos through droughts, erosion, and  floodsetc. The natural resources literally cry aloud for social control in a rational manner and failing to receive this control, take their dire vengeance upon humanity.

This is capitalism. This will not end. This is going to be the future.

Socialist Standard My Space

This blog by our Brooklyn comrade offers invaluable posts from the Socialist Standard archives and visits are well worth while.

http://socialiststandardmyspace.blogspot.com/

"I'm not racist, but....”

Scotland’s immigrant population is 369,284 -7% of the total population. Edinburgh has the highest number of immigrants with 75,696, but Aberdeen’s 35,436 is the largest proportionately, representing 16 per cent of the population. And Glasgow has seen the largest increase in numbers, up by almost 40,000 in a decade. 55,231 Poles were living in Scotland in 2011, more than 20 times higher than in 2001.

Europe as an ethnically homogenous nation-state is just a dream, and a pretty nasty one at that.  The free movement of labour is one of the basic premises of EU membership. It is always the way with  nationalists to hide racism under a cloak of caring about social conditions and forget that these were just as bad before any influx of immigrants. As the recession continues to bite, negative attitudes towards foreigners are becoming more common. Integration is often regarded as the key factor, but immigrant advocates say the whole burden of adjustment should not be borne by migrants themselves. Integration is the Holy Grail of immigration policy, accepted and promoted by all major political parties. There is the expectation  that they have to become like us and many are against cultural diversity.

We recently had Tom Harris, Labour MP for Glasgow South, offering his tuppence-worth in the Daily Telegraph which i am sure all his constituents read. He repeats all the usual stereotypes about the Roma, such as aggressive begging, even though laws presently exist  to stop that sort of thing and plenty of other laws against  all  the other alleged anti-social behaviour from happening. But par for the course as a Labour MP he never asks why the Roma are begging, appearing to believe its a comfortable desirable occupation to walk cold, windy, wet  Scottish streets, pleading for charity. It is because Romanians and Bulgarians are stopped from working and are refused benefits, legislation brought in by his government  that many beg as an alternative to starving.
He says "my constituents become angrier and more resentful, because the lives they have worked so hard to build for themselves and their families are being impinged upon by people whose culture, way of life and attitude to authority and those around them are utterly alien" [my emphasis] Then he goes on to associate accepting different cultures with the custom of female genital mutilation. He then implies that Labour should follow the Tory policy of further cutting benefits to migrant workers because "[Cameron] is speaking to a lot more people than just his own party’s Right wing."
So, his argument is not one of let us not challenge attitudes and try to change them, but rather, let us make sure we agree with the racists because it is not nice to call them prejudiced - especially if they are voters!!

We need people who want to make things better rather than scare-mongering MPs out to court popularity. Harris tries a mealy mouthed get out that he is not being racist and a xenophobe but he conveniently forgets that almost everywhere in Europe the Roma are exposed to a growing discrimination, ranging from exclusion from education and employment to racially motivated attacks. If we keep reading and hearing all the same tired old images of beggars and poverty it reinforces the prejudices. We'll fail to see the normality that are the experience of huge swathes of Romani society who are happily integrating - not to mention the common threads that bind us all.

 What people don't understand they tend to fear. There is a cycle of suspicion and hostility that generates anti-Roma sentiment, which in turn deepens prejudice and further pushes the community from the society into which we expect them to assimilate. Groups of men and socialise in the street, noisily chatting in Romani and gesticulating while their children play in the street. You can see how that is intimidating to a society that no longer know their neighbours in the same tenement building!

 The Roma distrust of authority is understandable, given their history of persecution and attempted genocide. In Eastern Europe there have been increased instances of firebombing, shooting, stabbing, beating and other violence towards the Roma community. France, Germany and Italy have expelled thousands of Roma.

Fotis Filippou of  Amnesty International said:
"Roma across Europe are being pushed to the margins of society as a result of forced evictions; they are attacked on ethnic basis, used as a scapegoat for wider societal problems, denied access to education and basic rights. The language used by media outlets across the region when reporting stories on Roma and the stereotyping rhetoric often used by politicians and public figures could have serious repercussions for the Roma all over Europe. It may further fuel the already existing prejudices against them and lead to stigmatisation and discrimination. Amnesty International calls on national and European authorities and media outlets to refrain from intentionally or unintentionally targeting Roma as an ethnic minority – and creating the perception in doing so that ethnicity can be linked to criminality – this is directly and unambiguously discriminatory, the effects of which could be disastrous.”
There is little chance of the Daily Telegraph, the Daily Mail, the Sun and the Daily Express of heeding such cautionary advice but let us not be mistaken even the “liberal” media has enthusiastically joined in the scape-goating of the Roma. Malcom X said “ If you are not careful, the newspapers will have you hating the people who are being oppressed and loving the people who are doing the oppressing”

 "Man tae man the world o'er shall brithers be, for a' that"

Enough of Capitalism - Time to End it Now

In the class war one prevalent propaganda message from the capitalists is that many people now regard it as fact. "Rich people create jobs." Specifically, by starting and directing companies, rich entrepreneurs and investors create the jobs that sustain everyone else. It is not only used to justify their existing wealth but offered as reason why their tax burden should be lowered. The prevailing propaganda story that justifies tax cuts for businesses and investors is that the huge profits they make, some of it is supposed to "trickle down" and  thus benefit everyone. Unfortunately, that's not the way it actually works. The world needs to think differently in how it wants to solve social and economic issues, such as inequality, climate change, hunger and disease.

Enough is enough. Enough inequality. Enough unemployment. Enough insecurity. Enough austerity. Enough of swallowing the lie that all of these things are as inevitable as the seasons and  unalterable. Enough of “just the way it is”. Enough of all that. What was made by man can be changed by man. Capitalism has had its time and now works for the privileged few, making the rich richer and leaving the rest of us more wretched.

People are disillusioned with the recession and its results. They know that true wages have been badly cut. and that their standards of life are being steadily depressed, while profiteering capitalists have made, and are still making, new fortunes. They see  world peace menaced by the incapable and greedy governments of the ruling classes.

 Unemployment, starvation and repression are the daily reality for millions of people around the world today. The world today is in a constant state of upheaval and conflict. The fact that such conditions prevail generally throughout the world, and have prevailed for a long time, logically suggests the presence of a common cause. That shared factor, the Socialist  Party has repeatedly demonstrated, is the capitalist system that does not and cannot work in the interests of the majority. It is a social system in which society is divided into two classes — a capitalist class and a working class. The capitalist class consists of a tiny minority — the wealthy few who own and control the instruments of production and distribution. The working class consists of the vast majority who own no productive property and must, therefore, seek to work for the class that owns and controls the means of life in order to survive.

 The history of the world has been a history of the protracted struggles of classes of people to change the economic and social relations of production and reproduction of their lives. The central object of this struggle is political power, and therefore the control of society. As socialists our goal is socialism; a world without class, without division, inequality and oppression which characterises present and preceding societies. Our immediate aim is to change this society. We do not attempt to lay out a blue print for socialism, because the conditions existing at the time of the capture of state power and expropriation of the capitalist class will determine the specific path of socialist construction. History has shown that attempts to impose preconceived strategies for socialist construction can result in a dictatorship over the proletariat.

We hold that revolution and the construction of socialism depends upon the working class being  the heart and soul of progress. The socialist movement are only participants who  aim to argue for the interests of the working class as a whole. We want to help change the world. It must be one in which production is carried on to satisfy human needs and wants. In short, it must be genuine socialism. Historical experience shows that the more democratic the process of deciding on and applying strategy and tactics the greater the political unity. And the greater the political unity the greater the ability to build and sustain unity of action.  It is the workers who create the new social framework and make the people’s ownership and their control and administration of the new social structure a reality. A world of peace, liberty and abundance for all stands within our grasp. The potential to create such a society exists, but that potential can be realised only if workers act to gain control of their own lives by organising, politically  for socialism.

 Accordingly, the Socialist Party calls upon the workers to muster under its banner for the purpose of advocating this revolutionary change and building class consciousness among workers  towards this end. Join us to put an end to the existing class conflict  by placing the land and the instruments of social production in the hands of the people  in a cooperative socialist society. Help us build a world in which everyone will enjoy the free and full benefit of their individual faculties. 

THIRST, STARVATION AND EXPLOITATION

More than 2,000 people have died of dehydration or malnutrition while in a care home or hospital in the last decade, according to figures published by the Office for National Statistics. 'The figures show the "underlying cause of death" in 2,162 recorded cases since 2003 was dehydration or malnutrition. They do not include the death toll in 2013. Campaigners said the figures were an "utter disgrace". "How can we call ourselves civilised when people are left to starve or die of thirst?  It is an utter disgrace that they are ever left without the most basic care," Dr Alison Cook, a director at the Alzheimer's Society, told the Daily Telegraph.' (Guardian, 2 December) After a life time of exploitation producing profits for the owning class this is the awful fate for many older workers. RD