A Better World

The basis of socialist society must be the common ownership of the means of production and distribution. The factory floor and the fields on the farm must be under the control of society as a whole, and not as at present under the control of individual capitalists or corporations.  What do we mean by 'society as a whole'? We mean that ownership and control is not the privilege of a class but of all the persons who make up society. No longer will one enterprise compete with another. The organisation of production shall be a cooperative organisation of all the members of society. Nationalisation or state ownership is where a small group controls everything; production has been organised, so that capitalist no longer competes with capitalist; conjointly they extract surplus value from the workers, who have been practically reduced to slavery. There may exist planned production against the anarchy of competition but also retained is the exploitation of one class by another.  There is a joint ownership of the means of production, but it is joint ownership by one class, an exploiting class that is in control of the State. Socialist society does not merely organise production; in addition, it frees people from oppression by others.

In socialism it is no longer the individual manufacturer who produces; the work of production is effected by the gigantic cooperative as a whole. In consequence of this change, we no longer have commodities, but only products. These products are not exchanged one for another; they are neither bought nor sold. They are simply stored in the communal warehouses, and are subsequently delivered to those who need them. In such conditions, money will no longer be required. There will be an ample quantity of all products, our present wounds will long since have been healed, and everyone will be able to get just as much as he needs. A person will take from the communal storehouse precisely as much as he or she needs, no more. No one will have any interest in taking more than he or she wants in order to sell the surplus to others, since all these others can satisfy their needs whenever they please. Money will then have no value. Some socialists suggest because of the history of capitalism and the shortages it has imposed upon vast numbers of people in the first days of socialist society, products will probably be distributed (rationed) in accordance with the amount of work done by the applicant but as a short half-way measure until manufacturing levels are suffice that all can be supplied according to the needs.

In a socialist society there will be no classes and as there will be no classes, this implies there will likewise be no State. The State is a class organisation of the rulers. The State is always directed by one class against the other. A capitalist  State is directed against the workers, whereas a ‘Workers’ State is directed against the capitalist. In the socialist society there are neither l capitalists, nor wage workers; there are simply people. If there are no classes, then there is no class war, and there are no class organisations. Consequently the State has ceased to exist. Since there is no class war, the State has become superfluous. There is no one to be held in restraint, and there is no one to impose restraint.

Administration and planning of production will be entrusted to various kinds of appointed and accountable committees. There will be no need for special ministers of State, for police and prisons, for laws and decrees - nothing of the sort. Just as in an orchestra all the performers watch the conductor's baton and act accordingly, so here all will consult the reports and will direct their work accordingly, or as sailors follow the advice of shipping forecasts and farmers heed the frost warnings of the meteorological offices. The State, therefore,  ceases to exist. There are no groups and there is no class standing above all other classes.

Moreover,  those working in these specialised co-ordination centres  one person will not be a  the permanent bureaucracy.

Socialism is organised throughout cooperatively. There will not be permanent strata of managers, nor will there be persons who do one and the same kind of work throughout their lives. Under capitalism, if a man is an assembly worker, he spends his whole life tending a machine; if he is the manager of a department, he spends his days in issuing orders and in administrative work; if he is a mere labourer, his whole life is spent in obeying orders. Nothing of this sort happens in communist society. With socialism people will enjoy a many-sided culture, and find themselves at home in various branches of production: one day in an administrative capacity, another  working on the shop-floor, One year perhaps in a hospital, tending the needs of the sick, another year in the forests planting saplings and chopping down trees. This will be possible when all the members of society have been suitably educated.

The class war now swallows up vast quantities of resources. In the new system this will be liberated and people will no longer struggle one with another.  How much, again, is lost to society through the competitive struggle of sellers one with another, of buyers one with another, and of sellers with buyers. How much futile destruction results from commercial crises. How much needless outlay results from the disorganization and confusion that prevail in production. The energy and the materials which now are wasted in wars will be saved. If we consider how much is squandered upon armaments alone, we shall realise that this amounts to an enormous quantity.

All these energies, which now run to waste, will be saved in socialism. The organisation of industry on a purposive plan will not merely save us from needless waste, in so far as large scale production is always more economical. In addition, it will be possible to improve production from the technical side. Under capitalism, there are definite limits to the introduction of new machinery. The capitalist only introduces new machinery when he cannot procure a sufficiency of cheap labour. If he can hire an abundance of cheap labour, the capitalist will never instal new machinery, since he can secure ample profit without this trouble. The capitalist finds machinery requisite only when it reduces his expenses for highly paid labour. Under capitalism, however, labour is usually cheap. The bad conditions that prevail among the working class become a hindrance to the improvement of manufacturing technique. This causal sequence is peculiarly obvious in agriculture. Here labour power has always been cheap, and for that reason, the introduction of machinery in agricultural work has been extremely slow. In communist society, our concern will not be for profit but for the workers. There every technical advance will be immediately adopted. The chains which capitalism imposed will no longer exist. Technical advances will continue to take place under communism, for all will now enjoy a good education, and those who under capitalism perished from want - mentally gifted workers, for instance - will be able to turn their capacities to full account.

Socialist production signifies the enormous development of productive forces. As a result, no worker in a socialist society will have to do as much work as of old. The working day will be  shorter, and as soon as mankind is enabled to spend less time upon feeding and clothing, it will be able to devote more time to the work of mental development. Human culture will climb to heights never attained before. It will no longer be a class culture, but will become a genuinely human culture. with the disappearance of man's tyranny over man, the tyranny of man over nature will likewise vanish. Men and women will for the first time be able to lead a life worthy of thinking beings instead of a lives of unthinking robots. “The needy man, burdened with cares, has no appreciation of the most beautiful spectacle.” said Marx. Socialism brings the sense of wonder and marvel to the minds of individuals

Socialists must never weary in our proofs and explanations, in order to convince our fellow workers that their hopes for a better life under capitalism are the outcome of fraud by others or are due to their own self-deception. We must patiently and clearly demonstrate that they ought unhesitatingly to enter the socialist party and despite all difficulties fight shoulder to shoulder with all those who work, to make common cause against the bosses.  The position of the worker  under capitalism is quite hopeless. We must tell people that as long as capitalism lasts there will always be a businessman riding on his or her back.  The Socialist Party must draw into our ranks all those who labour, all those to whom the new life is dear, all those who have learned to think and to fight.

Marxism is sometimes described as “the science of the working class movement”. Marxism is the doctrine of the class struggle. Marxism cannot be regarded as a system of abstract theories unrelated to real life but as a developed science verified and enriched by the acid test of experience. Marxism holds that the leading force in transforming society from capitalism to socialism is that class which is itself a product of capitalism, the working class or, as Marx more precisely defined it, the proletariat, i.e., wage workers who earn their livelihood through the sale of their labor power and have no other means of existence, all toilers and all working people working people is meant all who work for a livelihood and do not exploit the labor of others; a category which includes a large section of the farming population and of the middle class of the cities. Marxism constitutes a “guide to action” for the working class to follow in the struggle to achieve political power and to build socialism. Marxism maintains that the interests of the working class (the proletariat) and the interests of the capitalist class (the bourgeoisie) are irreconcilable and that therefore, the interests of the working class can not be served through collaboration or alliance with the capitalists but in opposition to them. From these conflicting interests of the two basic classes, bourgeoisie and proletariat, capitalists and workers, arises an antagonism, a struggle, between the two classes: the class struggle. The class struggle is not an invention of the Marxists but something which has manifested its existence in all countries of the world without exception. What Marxism does do is recognize the class struggle as the motive force of history, as the means by which society moves forward and achieves higher forms of civilization. Consequently, the strategy and tactics of Marxism are also the strategy and tactics of the class struggle of the working class. To give direction and guidance to this struggle, which is essentially a political struggle, the working class must of necessity develop its own Marxist political party, apart from and independent of all other political parties. Without such a Party, free from opportunism, irreconcilable towards compromisers seeking conciliation, in opposition to the capitalist class and its state power, the interests of the working class under capitalism cannot be served nor socialism eventually realized.

War Is Not A Normal Condition Of Man

We are all aware of the mental illnesses leading to breakdown and suicide of soldiers who have been in combat. In fact nine Canadian soldiers have committed suicide in the last few months. Another, related problem has arisen – the silence of those who suffer with mental illness. They worry that by coming forward to seek help they may be declared medically unfit and discharged from the forces. 4,500 soldiers leave the army every year and about 1,700 of those are considered medically unfit. So here we have a situation of people with a genuine need of psychiatric help remaining silent through fear of unemployment. As we keep saying,war is not a normal condition of man and a system that demands such barbarity must be terminated as soon as possible. John Ayers

Understanding socialism

Socialists visualise machinery and technology, created by the genius of humanity, being used, not for the few, but for the benefit of mankind as a whole. Based on the common ownership of the means of production and distribution, a new system is to be built, raising production and ending all social division by dissolving the hostile classes into a community of free and equal producers striving not for sectional interests, but for the common good. This socialist commonwealth, liberating the individual from all economic, political and social oppression, would provide the basis, for real liberty and for the full and harmonious development of the personality, giving full scope for the growth of the creative faculties of the mind.

 These days there is a tendency to reduce the meaning of socialism to the introduction of planned economy on the basis of a state-controlled life. The idea of socialism has been divorced from the idea of liberty. State capitalism has been regarded as a stage on the way to socialism and at present there prevails a great confusion of thought where various forms of state capitalism are referred to as socialism. The experiences of the Russian Revolution have revealed the grave innate dangers of state capitalism. State capitalism concentrates an overwhelming power in the hands of the State, and places the citizen completely at the mercy of the State. This State is not run by the working-class and its ruling class use their tremendous power to subjugate the people. Under State capitalism the government derives its income automatically from the economic enterprises of the State. The State becomes the universal employer, the universal landlord. It controls everything on which the fate and happiness of the individual citizen depend. The citizen is dependent on the State as regards employment, housing, supplies, amusement, educational and transport facilities. This enormous power of the State over the individual citizen must needs call forth or strengthen tendencies towards a dictatorship. Therein lies the chief danger of State capitalism. State capitalism does not yet solve any of the outstanding problems. It does not abolish crises, classes, the wage-system. Under State capitalism there is production of commodities for sale, not production for use. Between production and consumption there still remains the partition wall of prices.

 The scramble for profit has wasted and despoiled our world’s rich resources of soil, water, forest and minerals. A lack of social planning results in a waste of our human as well as our natural resources. Socialism offers the maximum opportunities for individual development and the satisfaction of human needs. Many call to “smash” the corporations, we socialists point it is not the  multinational monopolies but the capitalist system which is at fault.  The question for the workers is how to combine industrially and politically to got hold of these industrial giants and distribute their products throughout the whole community, according to the needs of those who have worked to produce.

What are we organised for? What is our chief bond of unity? What is our avowed object? The welfare of the working class and the abolition of capitalism.  We aim at a new society – the socialist commonwealth. Our aim is the commonwealth without State, without government, without classes, in which the workers shall administer the means of production and distribution for the common benefit of all. Industrial slavery is as old as capitalism itself, and before that there were other forms of slavery for the workers. So long as the capitalist system exists, some men will be mking money out of the labour of others. All reforms of the present system of society simply fool the worker into believing that he isn’t being robbed as much as he was before. Class-conscious workers of the world must attack and destroy capitalism and root it out of the world. The State is used to defend and strengthen the power of the capitalists and to oppress the workers. In order to destroy capitalism the workers must first wrest the State power out of the hands of the capitalist class. They must not only seize this power, but abolish the state apparatus entirely. The capitalist State is built to serve capitalism, and that is all it can do, no matter who is running it. propose to overthrow the capitalist State and to establish in its place immediately the industrial commonwealth. Socialists are also opposed to the State and wish to abolish it – to substitute for the government of men the administration of things. The State can only exist as long as there is class struggle. The private property of the capitalist class, in order to become the social property of the workers, cannot be turned over to individuals or groups of individuals, not to sectional owners such as syndicalist unions or cooperatives. It must become the property of all in common. Industries, too, which supply the needs of all the people, are not the concern only of the work-fore, in each industry, but of all in common, and must be administered for the benefit of all.

Much has been said and written about the new radicalisation yet for all the optimism it has not yet transmitted to a broader spectrum of the working class. What we are witnessing is indeed changing of attitudes, a shifting of beliefs, rejecting previously accepted ideas nd values. It is the response to the economic and social crises we re facing. This radicalisation is measured by the the search for new methods and new standards of social behavior, the desire for a complete change to something better. Who needs the “new” left today when it means trying to emulate the “old” left? What good is “participatory democracy” if it is only to lobby capitalist politicians?

Social forces do not arrive and marshal themselves in movements without some common factors being at work. There is no need to repeat the numerous issues and campaigns that have been conducted in current politics. People are seeing the  callousness of governments in subordinating the alleviation of poverty to the needs of capital accumulation. We have witnessed massive attacks on the working and the poor. People are angry at the attacks on their basic living conditions. A mass movement has never been more necessary but the left has not, except in isolated incidents, been able to rally masses of people. Protest groups in general have not been able to capitalise on the situation. The Left has failed to develop a significant political movement at a time when the need for such a movement is great. What has been the problem? Why has the Left failed?

When the crisis hit, the trade union movement responded in the same manner as it always had. That is, each union fought the cutbacks and layoffs on economic lines as any union would with its employer. This basic response is one of trying to win concessions and compromises. There is but one power which can bring freedom, happiness and peace to humanity. That power is the working class if well organised and determined to fight all who would oppose and prevent its complete emancipation. Socialism seeks to solve the  problem of human misery by revolution. We must always keep in mind that our goal is socialist revolution. Our agitation and propaganda is to help raise the level of class consciousness and understanding of what socialist revolution means. We must be above board and honest rather than manipulative.

Capitalism In Asia

Every day on the TV and press we are made aware of the appalling poverty that exists in Asian countries, but that is only part of the picture.'There are three times more Asian billionaires in Britain than there were five years ago while total wealth of the 101 richest Asians in the country has  risen 14pc to £51.5bn over the past 12 months alone.  The latest Asian Rich List is topped by the Hinduja brothers, Gopichand and Srichand, who have added £1bn to their wealth over the past year and now estimated to be worth £13.5bn.' (Daily Telegraph, 12 April) Millions starve in Asia but Asian billionaires increase their immense wealth - that is capitalism worldwide. RD

A Brutal Society

It is common for the media to depict the USA and its allies as always behaving in a humane fashion unlike its evil opponents who indulge in torture and other brutal tactics. Recent events seem to give the lie to such a notion. 'Senate committee found CIA interrogations and detentions to be 'brutal' and urges administration to release report as quickly as possible. A leak of the major findings of a landmark Senate inquiry into the CIA's post-9/11 torture of terrorism detainees led, on Friday, to intensified pressure on the White House and the CIA to release the inquiry speedily and with a minimum of redactions.' (Guardian, 11 April) Capitalism is a brutal competitive society and all its governments reflect that brutality in their actions. RD

The Passion of Freedom

Socialists keep hoping for the spark that will set a wildfire of workers in motion.  Some believe the worse our situation gets—economically, politically, ecologically—the more we yearn for a vast movement to erupt and transform the landscape. Others argue that it is only in times of a boom that workers have the luxury and confidence of political activity for something new rather than struggling to survive. We have felt the embers still glowing from past class  conflagration. In our lifetimes, we see sparks—but we haven’t seen them spread. We’re more connected than ever before, able to witness each other’s struggles in real time via the internet, yet mostly, the sparks haven’t leapt from one workplace to another,  city to city , one country to another country. The Occupy movement and Arab Spring were possibly the exceptions. Perhaps they were the dress rehearsal for something greater and the foundation for the next battle.

 In our workplaces, our collective task in the unions is to go up against the bosses, getting in fights, and by losing some and by winning some of them, we learn and acquire more experience for the next fight. Every day we must challenge those holding the power: over the daily indignities of pay, hours, grievances and injustices. We should be involved in community issues like pollution of the neighbourhoods we live in . Struggle teaches us that we have our own power—and teaches us how to use it. We begin by working to convince fellow workers that we have each other’s backs against a common enemy. We share the education about who our enemies are and how they’ve held onto power all these years when we outnumber them. We need to break down the fear many of us have come to phold when confronted by the State and employers. People have to create and own the vision and the strategy for power. They have to be the agents and organisers, not the props for professional politicians.  People will participate for things that really matter—things that captures their passion. It will take an immense effort by immense numbers to reverse the giant mess capitalism has made of everything which has brought our planet to the verge of eco-catastrophe.

The Socialist Party is the party of the interests of the working class, and is the enemy of capitalism which brings it into a fundamental opposition to all pro-capitalist parties. Its aim is the establishment of a socialist society in which the means of production will not be the private property of the few, a society which will not be based upon profit but on peoples needs.

 The problem before society to-day is not a financial problem as can be so easily mistaken by the attention given solely to one section of the capitalist class - the bankers.  It is a property problem. The banks belong to the superstructure of capitalism. Private property is the foundation. The financial crises, credit crises and the like are nothing more than the reflections of the fundamental economic crisis arising from the fact that the private ownership of the means of production has become an anachronism in a society where social methods of production have superseded individual methods of production. No amount of financial fiscal regulation, no amount of money supply manipulation which leaves the question of property ownership untouched, can do anything else but aggravate the crisis of capitalism.

Social ownership, which must supersede the private ownership of the means of production, can only come about through the political victory of the class without property over the class with property. The socialist task is one of abolishing capitalism altogether and founding an economy  based on a cooperative commonwealth and by commonwealth, we mean not a form of government rule, but an independent community holding its resources in common.

 The Socialist Party does not seek bloody revolution. But we do want the social revolution, i.e., a complete and fundamental change in the relation of the classes. It is a change which is only possible when a number of historical conditions exist. One of those conditions is that the majority of the workers must be ready to make the change. We foresee the advent of social conditions under which everyone will be relieved of the burden of material difficulty and distress; and under which, in consequence, mankind will be able, because its economic existence is assured, to devote itself to new and higher tasks. In this society of the future, personal freedom and the well-being of all without exception will, for the first time in history, become realities, and the individual will, at the same time, be able to develop fully his personal aptitudes and capacities.

Capitalism In The USA

Official statistics show a US economy in recovery, but 1 in 5 people in a new poll still say that there have been times in the last 12 months when they didn't have enough money to buy food. 'Despite official signs of economic recovery in the US, more Americans struggled to afford food in 2013 than in 2012. Gallup asked a large sampling of US adults if there have been times in the past 12 months when they did not have enough money to buy food that they or their families needed. Some 18.9 per cent of poll respondents said they had struggled to afford food, a nationwide total that compares with 18.2 per cent in 2012 and 17.8 per cent in 2008 (the lowest rate recorded since Gallup began asking the question in that year). By that measure, hunger in America appears to be edging up rather than down.' (Christian Science Monitor, 21 March) The USA is the world's most developed capitalist country yet one one in five go hungry. RD

The Plain Brutal Fact.

For some years, the apologists of capitalism have touted Sweden as an example that capitalism with a small dash of socialism will work. They mean free enterprise and the welfare state wedded together, that has meant some prosperity, low unemployment and lack of abject poverty in the country. However, the population of Sweden, as elsewhere, lives under capitalism and nothing stands still, so prosperity doesn't last. The Toronto Star of February 22, reports that they now have shanty- towns in the suburbs of Stockholm. Growing unemployment in the last six years has caused at least twenty shanty-towns to spring up. That's in a country that has largely avoided Europe's debt and economic crisis but now has beggars on the streets. The plain, brutal fact is that no matter how good things may get, at times, under capitalism, it won't last. John Ayers.

Canaries in the Coalmine!

 UNICEF is making an unprecedented appeal for $2.2 billion to avert a crisis of 59 million children around the world at risk from war, hunger, exploitation, disease, and natural disasters. The report (Toronto Star, Feb 23) says the children are the canaries in the coalmine pointing to the state of the world and those who will soon inherit it. "Keep on rocking in the Free world" as Neil Young sang. Indeed! John Ayers.

Socialist Democracy

The Socialist Party will defend every democratic right won in the course of the long years of struggle. The Socialist Party will defend everything which will facilitate a peaceful revolution on the basis of popular consent to majority rule. Socialism is the rule (‘government’ if you so wish) of the people, by the people, for the people, based upon the social collective ownership of the means of production. By bringing men together primarily as buyers and sellers of each other, by enshrining profitability and material gain in place of humanity, capitalism has always been inherently alienating. A socialist transformation of society will return to mankind to its sense of humanity, no longer treated as a commodity. A socialist democracy implies man's control of his and her  immediate environment as well, and in any strategy for building socialism, community democracy is as vital as the struggle for electoral success.

To that end, socialists must strive for democracy at those levels that most directly affect us all — in our neighborhoods, our schools, and our places of work. Tenants' unions, consumers' and producers' cooperatives are examples of areas in which socialist must lead in efforts to involve people directly in the struggle to control their own destinies. The struggle to build a democratic socialist world must proceed at all levels of society. Democracy, the achievement of a struggle of generations, has to be safeguarded by the working class. But for the working class defence means extension. This enthusiasm of millions cannot be effectively roused merely of the defence of the status quo existing in democratic countries. The most effective defence of democracy is a clear fight for the improvement of conditions of the people, especially a struggle for the raising of the bottom from the sordid conditions of toil and misery under which he or she subsists.

Socialism is not some utopian scheme. Capitalism has created the economic conditions for socialism. Today there is social production but no social ownership. Socialism will bring social ownership of social production. In socialism, the working people will take over the economic forces developed by capitalism and operate them in the interests of society. Socialism will be a higher level of social development because the working people will control the great wealth they produce, they will be fundamentally able to determine their own futures. The end of exploitation of one person by another will be an unprecedented liberating and transforming force. Socialism will not mean state control. The exact features of socialism will emerge as our struggle against capitalism develops. Based upon study of society we can visualize some features.

The means of production – the factories, mines, mills, offices, farms, transportation , media and communications, medical facilities, big retailers, etc., will be transformed into public (common) property. Private ownership of the means of production will end. The economy will be geared not to the interest of profit, but to serving human needs. This will release the productive capacity of the economy from the limitations of profit maximization. A great expansion of useful production and the wealth of society will become possible.

Rational scientific planning will replace the present anarchistic system of production. Coordination and planning of the broad outlines of production by public agencies (local regional and worldwide) will aim at building an economy that will be stable and benefit the people. Capitalism has already developed an inter-linked economy, socialism’s main task will be to reorient this structure towards social needs. Capitalist planning is not the same thing as socialist planning. Although there may be a period of reorganisation after the revolution, we will not face the problem of building a modern economy. Redirecting the productive capacity to human needs will require a variety of economic methods and some experiment. There could be a combination of computer planning plus local coordination, depending on what will be appropriate to changing conditions. But no matter what means are chosen, a socialist economy must uphold the basic principles of democratic common ownership, production for the people’s needs, and the elimination of exploitation, as well as the protection of the environment. Socialism will open the door to great many beneficial changes for people.  Workers will be cherished as the builders and masters of society as they assume administration of the economy, managing democratically their own work places through workers’ councils serve society’s interests as well as their own. There will be no overnight transformation of men and women in socialism, but the way will be cleared to achieve a decent, meaningful and productive life for all people so they can enjoy fuller and more complete lives.  People will no longer be viewed as simply dispensable means to accumulate profits. Cultural life, The arts, sports, education, popular entertainment and other forms of leisure will not be determined by worship of money.  Science, freed from patent law and intellectual property rights, would be devoted to spreading the frontiers of human knowledge and not expanding a corporation’s market share.

Only socialists are the true fighters for democracy. The struggle for socialism is in reality the struggle for democracy. Conversely, democracy is the champion of all generous-hearted efforts to attain general well-being and communal interest. The complete victory of democracy, would usher in socialism.

The Real Power Struggle

The Socialist Party endorses the principle of democracy, that is rule for and by the people. Organisation is another principle we stand by in the working class fight for emancipation, hence,  over-riding importance of democratic organisation. Political organisations have grown up, though not everywhere in exactly the same way, because the political conditions are different in different countries, nevertheless, a political party needs general principles for its propaganda; for its fight with other parties it wants a theory having definite views about the future of society.  Socialist parties have the special task of fighting by political means for the needs and interests of the workers.

A political party engaged in discussion of theory in the Marxian sense does not do it for the sake of agreeable mental exercise. It is not performed for scholastic academic purposes.  It is concerned with theory because it needs to know how to act and not act, and avoid a merely opportunistic or adventuristic basis. Elaboration of theory leads to practical application of political ideas.  We cannot abandon the conception of party democracy and workers democracy as did the old Communist Parties. They espoused a mystical un-Marxian belief that the Party could do no wrong and any amount of political trickery and chicanery could be justified to “capture” the trade unions or other political groups. The Socialist Party will does not advocate or employ such methods.

The might of the workers fails because it is not consciously directed against capitalism. The persistent reformist may brush aside this difficulty by admitting it. That we say is true, runs the argument.- “ conditions have changed. The present is better than the past." Those who spread these arguments are either themselves deceived or they plan to deceive others.

 In the thirties workers redeemed their temporary submission to capitalism with increasing challenges to the very foundations of capitalism. The sanctity of property they repudiate with sit-ins.  In response to assaults of police and militia they answered during strikes with whatever weapons at their disposal. The injunctions of judges they disregarded. The very necessities of existence compelled  them, in their economic struggles, to challenge capitalism or sink into submission and poverty.

The chasm that divides capitalists and workers nowadays yawns deeper and wider apart. This is once more filling up with discontent which, once directed and released, will roll like a torrent and shatter with its power capitalism. This is the present and this is the future which confronts capitalism and the capitalists.

 Capitalism must struggle to keep up profits. That is the life-blood of the system. That is the foundation for the dominance of the capitalists. Viewed from their angle, both capitalism and the political dominance of the capitalist class must be maintained even if workers and everyone except the narrowing circle of capitalists, are bent beneath the back-breaking burden of economic exploitation. The one question we pose is: How can they keep the swelling discontent from overthrowing them and their system?

The liberal capitalists think capitalism can best be served by keeping the people quiet with minor concessions. Other capitalists think that concessions that were minor during the period of expanding capitalism are major now because capitalism is in recession and since they cannot be granted discontent is sure to grow therefore coercive measures should be in place to contain any resistance. In the face of growing conflict, liberal capitalists and more authoritarian capitalists forget differences and unite for the maintenance of capitalism and the power of their class. This means dealing out blows against any workers movements that may arise. Occupy was doomed by its isolation from the rest of the labour movement. The class struggle, is a struggle for power. The class struggle itself is a form of war, social war, and class power decides the issue. The power of the feudal nobility lay in landed estates; that of the bourgeoisie in its capital and ownership of the industrial estates; the power of the proletariat lies in its massive numbers. 

Capitalism In Europe

Despite press reports of some sort of economic recovery the job situation is still grim for millions of unemployed workers. Greece, of course, has been hit the hardest: Its unemployment rate is still hovering above 27 per cent, but the whole European situation is still dire. 'In the broader 28-nation European Union, 25.9 million people remain jobless, out of a potential labour force of about 244 million. Data released last week showed no change in the euro zone's 11.9 per cent unemployment rate in February. Spain's jobless figure was 25.6 per cent, and Italy's was at a new high of 13 per cent.' (New York Times, 8 April) This so-called efficient social system is denying potential productive workers of contributing to society. RD

Cover Up Capitalism

Police are failing to properly record crimes as serious as rape to hit performance targets, a damning report has revealed. The Public Administration select committee called for local Police and Crime Commissioners to abolish all targets to  help restore public trust in  crime figures. They also called for an investigation into treatment of a police officer who blew the whistle on corrupt recording practices. 'Former Metropolitan Police officer James Patrick described how massaging numbers to hit targets had become "an ingrained part of policing culture". He exposed how crimes were routinely downgraded, with robberies logged as theft and burglary reclassified as "criminal damage"or even "no-crime" to make them "disappear in a puff of smoke". (Daily Mail, 9 April) So all that prime TV drama about super efficient police is in reality a complete fiction. RD

Power to Destroy - Power to Create

Although the current spirit of the working class is not a revolutionary one, the problems we have today in understanding the nature of revolutionary action do not stem primarily from an insufficiency of capitalist development or a lack of historical experience of class struggle. The Socialist Party analysis does not provide a guarantee of a libertarian future. That depends now as before on the workers' response to their conditions. But we endeavour to  show that such a future is not just a utopian dream but a real possibility worth fighting for. Marxist ideas are, if anything, more relevant today than it was in Marx's time, when large portions of the world were still untouched by capitalism. At the present time, it is true, the workers' movement has reached a uniquely low point even though  the world working class, larger than ever, and more closely than ever linked through their exploitation by the world market, faces the very conditions and necessities that Marx discerned over a century ago. The current recession demonstrated that the capitalist crisis was not something of the past now made obsolete but rather the crisis rendered  obsolete those theories of both the right and left wing economists. If  Marx is now more relevant than ever, the ‘Marxist’ tradition of the Leninists has little to offer us as a guide to understanding, and much to confuse us with.

From the past we draw not only inspiration and still-meaningful ideas but also lessons on mistakes to be avoided. The fundamental idea of the old labor movement, that the working class can build up its forces in large organizations in preparation for the "final conflict" has proven premature, if not false. Whether the organization was that of reformist or of ‘revolutionary; parties, producer or consumer cooperatives, or trade unions, its success has always turned out to be a success in adapting to the needs of survival within capitalism. The Bolshevik vanguard preparing for the day when they would lead the masses to the conquest of state power has also proven useless for our purposes. Such parties have had a role to play only in the unindustrialized areas of the world, where they have provided the ruling class needed to carry out the work of forced economic development unrealized by the native bourgeoisie. In the developed countries they have been condemned either to sectarian insignificance or to transformation into reformist parties of the social-democratic type.

As our goal in the Socialist Party is that of democratic control over social life, our principles must be those of collective action for only successes which have a future are those involving the class as a whole. We see our party as neither leaders nor bystanders but as part of the struggle. We organize lectures and study groups. We publish a journal and pamphlets. We hope to be of some use in making information available about past and present struggles and in discussing the conclusions to be drawn from those. At some point in history the world's working class will  move from resistance to revolution, expropriate the capitalists, and create a society on the basis of "the free and equal association of producers".  It was in order to aid the workers to realize their collective capabilities that Marx wanted to "lay bare the laws of motion of capitalist society" in Capital. He wanted to understand, and so help others understand, the social realities that make possible new forms of social action, and the new forms of thinking that such action involves. The historical process Marx was interested in would consist precisely in people's attempts to change the society in which they find themselves. Theoretical work, in leading to a better understanding of society and so of the tasks involved in changing it, should serve as an element of these attempts. This is the content of Marxist politics of the Socialist Party.

The nature of the goal dictates the form which revolutionary organizations must have. Thus the General Rules for the International Working Men's Association, began with  "That the emancipation of the working classes must be conquered by the working class themselves." Its intention, in Marx's words, "to combine and generalize the spontaneous movements of the working classes, but not to dictate or impose any doctrinaire system whatever." Regarding organization, Marx argued against centralism, on the grounds that a centralist structure, "goes against the nature of trade unions," organizations of workers. Typical of his attitude is his remark in a letter of 1868 that especially in Germany, "where the worker's life is regulated from childhood on by bureaucracy and he himself believes in the authoritarian bodies appointed over him, he must be taught above all else to walk by himself." In the same spirit, Marx refused the presidency of the International in 1866, and soon afterwards convinced its General Council to replace the post with that of a chairman to be elected at every weekly meeting. He put his writing skills at the service of the International, in preparing statements of position, official communications, and so forth.

The main task that Marx took on as a revolutionary intellectual, however, as the task- of theory: the elaboration of a set of concepts, at a fairly abstract level, that would permit a better comprehension of the struggle between labor and capital. He prefaced the French serial edition of the first volume of Capital with an expression of pleasure, because "in this form the book will be more accessible to the working class -a consideration which to me outweighs everything else." The function of theory was to help the movement as a whole clarify its problems and possibilities; it did not, in Marx's view, place the theorist in a dominating (or "hegemonic," as the currently fashionable term has it) position vis-a-vis the movement, but was rather what he had to contribute to a collective effort.

Discussing the utopian socialists, Marx observed that:
"So long as the proletariat is not yet sufficiently developed to constitute itself as a class, and consequently so long as the struggle itself of the proletariat with the bourgeoisie has not yet assumed a political character, and the productive forces are not yet sufficiently developed in the bosom of the bourgeoisie itself to enable us to catch a glimpse of the material conditions necessary for the emancipation of the proletariat and for the formation of a society, these theoreticians are merely utopians who, to meet the wants of the oppressed classes, improvise systems and go in search of a regenerating science. But in the measure that history moves forward, and with it the struggle of the proletariat assumes clearer outlines, they no longer need to seek science in their minds; they have only to take note of what is happening before their eyes and to become its mouthpiece.”

 History offers us more than a supplement to the observation of what is happening before our eyes, as it allows for the detachment from it of concepts and models to aid in the interpretation of present-day events. Such utopian concepts and models cannot provide us with strategy and tactics for the situations we face and will face, but they are essential as an education that helps prepare us for the creativity that revolutionary activity requires.

To the extent that a real workers' movement put into existence, the little parties and groups should " merge in the class movement and make an end of all sectarianism." as Marx explained. The reborn protest movement does not represent a new stage in the development of radicalism, but rather an enlargement of what existed before. The workers fought massive and militant struggles to establish the unions against the corporations and won definite advantages.

Forced Marriage for 140 Million Girls!

 "Equality Now", a human rights group, said in a recent report that cultural traditions and a lack of legal protections are driving tens of millions of girls around the world into early marriages, subjecting them to violence, poverty, and mistreatment. The report said that more than 140 million girls over the next decade will be forced into marriage before the age of eighteen. Dividing the working class into races, religions, colours, and sexes is a ploy of the owning class and this is one result, besides the obvious – lack of concerted working class action. John Ayers.

Capitalism In Africa

The development of capitalism in Africa has led to the enrichment of a tiny handful but no such fortune awaits the working class. 'Nigeria's economy is worth $510 billion (£307 billion), by far the biggest in Africa, officials said  after a long-overdue recount that gives it continental bragging  rights but does little for the near 70 per cent of its citizens living in poverty.' (Times, 7 April) This development is typical of how the system works world-wide - affluence for a tiny minority, poverty for the majority. RD

The Consequence of Crises

Historians used to refer to the 1870s as the "Great Depression" before the 1930s slump stole the name and in 2008 it became the “Great Recession”. The history of capitalism has been characterized by what is commonly called the "boom-bust cycle". In every boom, promises are made by economists and politicians that depressions are now "a thing of the past" and that capitalism has entered a new era of prosperity. But every boom so far has turned out to be just as temporary as the previous one. Sooner or later, every boom has collapsed into yet another recession. The Great Depression of the 1930s is only vaguely remembered and then recalled as an act of God, from which no relevant conclusions can be drawn. Already a false narrative is being created in relation to the latest “Great Recession” and its history re-written.

One reason for the inevitable but always impatiently waited recovery is many of the insolvent companies are taken over by larger, surviving companies. The purchase price the surviving company must pay for the assets of the bankrupt company is much lower than the capital originally invested in those assets. As a result, the same physical assets, capable of producing just as much profit, now require a much smaller investment of capital. In other words, the potential rate of profit is increased for the surviving companies. Of course, the bankruptcy of capitalist firms is also the cause of much of the misery suffered by the working population during a depression, the lay-offs and the pay-cuts. And those too contribute to the recovery of profits. Yet another tool for the employer is the introduction of new technology to increase productivity. Sometimes workers output is increased simply by demanding more and harder work, such as unpaid overtime, and  in the case of office workers, using the internet and mobile phones at home. Pay can be cut only so much, the pace of work can be increased only so much, before these actions begin to cause a reaction—the resistance of the working population so there is another strategy of the capitalist class to reduce labour costs -  relocation or sub-contracting to a low-wage country with less worker protection in the form of health and safety legislation (or weak environmental laws.)

 Keynesians say the solution to the problem of depression is whenever capital investment slows down, the government should take up the slack by increasing its own spending. However, as Paul Mattick pointed out a long time ago, government spending is financed by taxing or borrowing income produced in the capitalist sector. Therefore, an increase in government spending generally requires that a greater portion of the total surplus-value be taxed or borrowed by the government. A correspondingly smaller portion of the total surplus-value is available for investment as capital. As a result, the increase in government spending further aggravates the shortage of surplus-value, which caused the decline in capital investment in the first place, and ultimately leads to a further decline in investment.

The negative effect that increased government spending has on capital investment is being emphasized forever quoting the National Debt figures, who instead  suggest cuts in government spending as a stimulus to investment, that is slashing public welfare budgets. However, these conservative economists forget the reason why government spending has increased in recent years—to offset a prior decline in investment. Therefore, cuts in government spending will most likely bring, not a revival of capital investment, but rather, a sharp rise in unemployment, not to mention the inflationary side-effect. Austerity proposes to reduce government spending by eliminating those social programs which are supposed to contribute to the education, housing, medical care, or survival of the impoverished. There is only one way the system can improve this situation. That is to raise profits by lowering labor costs. If it could do this, it would be able to expand profitably without raising prices. And it could regain international markets, both by the direct savings on labor costs and by modernizing the antiquated industrial plant with the proceeds. Such a strategy is of course nothing new.

Only a minority of workers are unionized and the unions themselves vary greatly with respect to their bargaining power and the character of their bureaucracies. Nearly all exclude effective control on the part of their membership. Everything is left to the officials, just as politics is left to the wealthy elite. Sometimes, the union officers may change but the system remains the same.

 People can vote in general election , and those who vote—often  less than half of those eligible —can exchange a Democratic administration and presidency for Republican, a Tory politician for Labour Party one, or whatever the respective parties are in the predominant two-party systems of most countries and in doing so, they can exchange one set of people for another, equally determined to maintain the capitalist system which, in turn, determines the range of their own policies. Thus, although big business always dominates everywhere. The specific interests of the big corporations determine the destiny of the system as a whole. The state is the state of the corporations and depends on the health and wealth of their profitability. Those in  government , or holding public office, need not be pressured by the big corporations to do their bidding; they do so on their own accord. Moreover, the personnel of state and capital are interchangeable; corporation managers enter government service, while state officials move into the management of corporations, by the aptly named "revolving-door". Big Business dominates the political apparatus  and cannot be dislodged short of destroying the capitalist system itself.  It continues to dress its mercenary rule in democratic garb although it is increasing. lt transparent that political parties are bought and paid for. Democracy begins and ends with the ballot-box but  also  involving free speech, free assembly, and freedom of the media and they are not made use of in opposition to the capitalist system, anything contrary to accepted wisdom receives no audience. The systematic manipulation of "public opinion" is used as an instrument of class rule and the specific interests of the ruling class must be made to appear as the general interest,  the means of persuasion—the academic think tanks of the  university system that are sponsored by so-called philanthropic endowments, the press, radio, and television and increasingly even the supposed free internet and social media, cater exclusively to the needs of the capitalist system. For sure, the intellectuals and commentators may differ in some of their answers and vary their wares to suit their market but all ultimately serve the same purpose, namely, ideological support of the status quo. Politics is  a business albeit a competitive business where the ravings of one tries to outbid the rantings of another in a spectacle of inane verbiage or meaningless soundbites. A corrupt government is replaced by another corrupt government. Incredulously,  people continue to believe in this system of social control as preferable to any other, and express their patriotism in its defence.

There is now a  general optimism created by the “anti-capitalist” movement, engendered by the designers of  the various "post-capitalism" models which do represent expressions of a deep discontent, no matter how vaguely defined. However, newly-arising popular movements may very well sidetrack the aspirations of the working class into channels of activity that defeat their own purpose and which erroneously founded on the potentially totalitarian principle of to "each according to his work" disguised as co-operative and worker-owned enterprise, or calling for a more strongly regulated economy that still incongruously protects private property rights.

On the world stage so long as their investments are not endangered, the form of government which protects them is quite immaterial, and this indifference allows for adherence to the principle of non-intervention in the affairs of other nations. It is not the desire for a "democratic world" which moves the policy-makers, but merely the need for governments—dictatorial or not—that will protect capital investments and allow for international trade favorable to international capital. In such cases governments may take measures detrimental to capital or grows unstable enough to jeopardize profits it becomes necessary to install more malleable ones. Covert and overt intervention will replace governments with another regime, in order to secure both the specific commercial interests and if deemed necessary directly intervene in another country’s internal affairs. Even without this military big-stick,  client nations through their financial dependence on the capital market, just as the peonage of the landless peasant can be maintained by keeping him perpetually in debt to the landlord, are forced to submit to Western hegemony through their indebtedness to international  banks and the International Monetary Fund (IMF) or the European Central Bank (ECB). Loans are denied unless they submit to a program of "austerity" designed to increase, with the profitability of capital, their ability to honor their financial obligations. Economic budgetary "discipline" is imposed upon debtor nations such as Greece or Portugal or Ireland in order to maintain, or restore, their credit-worthiness. Of course, this is just "good business", even though it may result in great social distress and  unrest. Enforced "austerity" turns into general misery.

Those of us who are revolutionary optimists see within the rising resistance of workers at the grassroots,  new forms of organized activity more in keeping with their real needs. The apparent tranquility of working class is steadily being undermined and the attempts to contain it rests upon shifting sand. The previous gradual character of the economic decline of workers, almost indiscernible to the “middle” class relying on their credit cards and mortgage equity partly explained the apparent apathy despite the continuing reduction of their incomes but now they do not see themselves in an enviable cocoon where their own living conditions are outside the increasing misery. Austerity cuts are being imposed upon all workers and to effectively resist, all workers must come together to fight back. 

A future world

What is blocking the way to economic and social progress? Socialists reply: The system of profit-making, the ownership and control of industry by a few capitalists for their own gain and not for the benefit of the people. Standing in the way of social progress and socialism is the ruling class composed of the owners, the share-holders and CEOs of the huge multinational banks and corporations that control the economic life with power that extends far beyond the boundaries of any one country and  controls the destinies of millions around the globe. These capitalists are very wealthy and live off the exploited labor of others.  In opposition to this minority is the vast majority of the rest of the population. The working class is systematically and exploited by capitalism, and is therefore a revolutionary class. he working class is composed of all wage earners – mental and manual, urban and rural – whether in basic industry, manufacturing, service, farm, sales, domestic, clerical, public, or other jobs. The working class is composed of skilled and unskilled, employed and unemployed. Some workers may make more money than others, but they are still members of the working class because they do not exploit the labour of others and must sell their labour power to survive. The vast majority of people belong to the working class. The working class produces the wealth appropriated by the capitalists and its basic interest lies in the abolition of the private ownership of the means of production. It is this fact leading the working class to the socialist revolution. Yet at this moment in time only a small number of workers see the need for fundamental change and want to bring this about. The majority of workers at present do not understand the need for basic change or socialism. They have difficult lives, but they do not see how their problems can be resolved. These workers want an improvement in their lives and often struggle against their employers, but they do not understand yet the need for revolutionary change. Many are generally content with their situation or feel that, even though things could improve, capitalism is the best system. Every time working people placed hope in what promised great changes would be bring about, they have been sadly disappointed.

As the conditions of life deteriorate more and more workers will become politically conscious and understand the need for socialism, becoming increasingly  open to the ideas of socialism. Through experience and education, workers are learning that their interest lies in the overthrow of capitalist private property and the establishment of socialist ownership. But such a revolution will require the unity of the workers of all lands. The working class is world-wide, composed of workers of many different nationalities. Their common identity is that they are all exploited by the capitalist class. Socialists must oppose nationalism and forge unity with their fellow workers of all nationalities for the struggle against our common enemy, in the common effort for full democracy and socialism.

The state suppresses and controls opposition to capitalism while maintaining social order to provide a stable environment for capitalists to conduct their businesses.  It does this through the massive state apparatus and bureaucracy , including the courts, police, army, and jails. It helps direct and supervise the capitalist economy. The working class would like to attain socialism without violence and will use every available means to attain its goal of socialism. It will utilize all legal possibilities and legislative approaches to improve the conditions of life and the struggle for socialism.

The solution for the ills of present-day society is the social ownership of the industries and national wealth and production for the common good, instead of profits for the few. Capitalism is the basic cause of war in modern times.  Capitalism controls the entire globe and war results from the struggles of the  leading capitalist countries to re-divide the world, to wrest from each other spheres of influence and market share, cheaper labour and supplies of raw material.

Socialism can be achieved only by the will of the people, when the conditions have become ripe for the historical changeover from capitalism to socialism. Socialism will thus triumph as the result of the will and actions of the people, and cannot be imposed from outside. The way forward for democracy is through the establishment of socialism, which will open up a new  future for all the people. The solution is to end the private ownership of the means of production and replace it with social ownership and production planned to meet the people’s needs, that is, socialism. Socialism puts an end to wars and the danger of wars because under socialism there are no capitalists who are interested in war profits and the conquest of new markets. Socialist planning abolishes anarchy of the market and thereby puts an end to depressions and unemployment. Social ownership ends exploitation of man by man because it is through private ownership of the factories and workshops, mills and mines that the wealthy minority exploit the great mass of the people. Social ownership frees the energies of the people and productive forces for economic, social and cultural advances.

 Socialism does not destroy democracy but, on the contrary, enormously extends democratic liberties. The only “liberty” which Socialism ends is the liberty of the privileged class to own industry and amass wealth at the expense of the great majority. Socialism ends all exploitation and oppression of the producers by a privileged parasitical class. By ending the political, economic and financial domination by the plutocratic  elite, socialism, for the first time, creates the conditions for the free expression of the people’s will. Nor does Socialism “worship the State” and aim at domination of the individual by an all-powerful State. As socialism becomes firmly founded, the State “withers away” and the full direction is in the hands of a co-operative society producing for the benefit of all.

How is Socialism to be achieved? What are the forces making for Socialism? How can we best go forward? Socialism can only be achieved through working class struggle. Only the organised power of the people can achieve this aim. Our aim is to achieve Socialism by peaceful means. The trade union movement, embracing a united working class, will play a key-role. Working-class unity, socialists in the socialist parties, in the unions, will strengthen the working class. The machinery of State will be transformed. Parliaments will be filled by true delegates of the workers movement, who will be subject to recall at any time by a majority of their electors and the whole of the people will be drawn into active participation in the administration of every sphere of daily life. The Socialist Party sees the future society as one of world-wide co-operation for the common good of all peoples. It means a peaceful, free world instead of one torn by rivalries, prejudices and war. The Socialist Party will work to win, the labour movement to this object. 

Capitalism or Socialism

There are the two main features of the production for profit economic system.

Firstly, the labourers on the average replace the value of their wages for the capitalist class in the first few hours of their day's work ; the exchange value of the goods produced in the remaining hours of the day's work constitutes so much embodied labour which is unpaid ; and this unpaid labour is so embodied is divided  in the shape of profit, interest and rent, the spoils to be argued over and shared out by the employer, the banker and the land-owner. The surplus value provided out of unpaid labour enables the idle classes and their dependants to live in luxury at the expense of persistent overwork and misery for the producers themselves.

Secondly the other feature is the antagonism between the socialised method of production and the individualised system of exchange. This brings about unmitigated anarchy in the shape of recurring world-wide crises, which throws workers out of work when they are as anxious for employment for their subsistence. The introduction of new technology increases uncertainty of employment.

 How to make money is the be-all and end-all of this ruinous system of competitive production for profit. All life is subject to the rule of the market - going, going, gone! Knocked down to the highest bidder. For re-construction and re-organisation of society is what we socialists continually strive for so none shall be able to force others to work for their profit. We say this is a class war. We mean to break down competition, and instead create  (or rather enhance) co-operation.

The Revolution is prepared in the womb of society, it needs but one organised effort to give birth to a new world. The first great revolutionary effort of the workers will be to take political power for so long as the capitalist stronghold of the State has not been captured, all proletarian measures will be refused or if conceded, it will be in such a form that they become illusory, and only benefit the capitalist class. When the capitalists are dispossessed of political power, then only will the workers’ party be able to commence their economic expropriation. There will be neither wages nor market prices. Human society will then once more have entered a period of communism.

The whole world has divided into two camps, for or against the social revolution.  Between socialism and capitalism there can be no peace, no co-operation, but only class war, till one or other wins. The workers can do away with the capitalist class and can exist without it, because the workers are the producing class. But the capitalist class could not exist without us.

Capitalism has become an obsolete oppressive system that ought to be got rid off. A relatively small minority recognise this and are consciously anti-capitalist, but the majority continue trying to satisfy their needs within the system rather than by overthrowing it. So there is no real possibility of overthrowing that system and attempts to do so degenerate into futile reformism and/or terrorism, whatever the “revolutionary” rhetoric. There is no difference between a Labour Party and a Tory’ Party today – both accept that they must make the system work, and work against us. These days people are rightly cynical about the “policies” and “programmes” of political parties. Leninist ideas are widely discredited. A substantial proportion of the population needs to be drawn into active political struggle and confront questions of what society is and how to get out of its clutches. There is no crisis that the ruling class could not resolve if it was allowed to, but with the masses politically active, the possibility arises of the ruling class not being allowed to recover and of people taking their future into their own hands.

In boom conditions, many workers can expect better jobs, with a higher standard of living and better conditions (relatively). Capitalists can find opportunities for profitable investment with international trade expanding although the different nations and sectional interests are fighting over their share of an expanding “cake” but there is always room for compromise about who benefits more. Nobody is actually asked to accept being worse off than they are already. Reforms may be fought bitterly, but there is scope for reform without shaking the whole system apart.

In a crisis all this is reversed. The cake has gotten smaller and the fight is over who is to bear the loss.  Among capitalists the fight is over who is to survive as dog eats dog. The struggle for international markets between nations as well as between individual financial groups intensifies. Between capitalists and workers there is no longer room for compromise. Reforms become impossible and even past concessions will be rolled back as the government and the bosses plaintively explain “We can’t afford any benefits any more”. Within the working class too, there is less unity as people find themselves in “hard times” where it is “everyone for themselves” and search out easy scapegoats to blame for their mounting difficulties.

All that stops the continued expansion of wealth and opportunities is the capitalist system of production for private profit. All that is needed for the unemployed workers to use the idle plant to produce goods that people want and need, is a socialist system of production for use instead of profit.

Fortunately, the confusion on the Left is so great there is at least a chance the existing “Left” movements will disintegrate completely and there will be room for something new and genuinely revolutionary to emerge. We witness the demise of a number of Left parties and mergers and unity of the survivors. The task of building an alternative to the Left is, at present, primarily negative – exposing and undermining their reactionary ideas. But we need to be constructive at the same time, to open the way for a revolutionary movement that is fighting for progress rather than reacting against capitalism, and that is about winning political power to actually implement the social changes it is fighting for, instead of whining about the present rulers of society. If the working class do not form a political party that aims to take power from the old regime then the old regime must continue. It will not just disappear in a burst of anarchist enthusiasm.

It has been said that there can be no blueprints for the future because the people themselves will decide how to build the new society as they are building it, nevertheless, it is appropriate to put forward a few ideas for discussion about what to do to start building socialism. Marxist concepts that sum up important truths from the history of revolutionary struggle seem empty because they have been repeated so often as banalities. If socialists do not propose alternative ways of living that are more desirable and effective than those of the old system, then why should anyone support a revolution? So we need to go beyond denouncing what the existing system is doing and start offering constructive alternatives, even though any such proposals are bound not to be fully worked out in every detail and aspect at this stage. Reformists will make endless proposals as to how the present system should deal with problems and questions of how socialism would cope with these problems will forever crop up.

We cannot always talk about revolution in the abstract.

A large part of the labour force, work for the state at one level or another, directly for the government or as part of a “publically” owned corporations. These are state capitalist industries. They remain capitalist because they still employ labour for making profit by selling goods on the market. The state is responsible for hiring and firing.

Some reformists view this as part of the  process that transforms capitalist production for profit into socialised  production for use, and wage labour into cooperative labour for the common good. But no matter how much state ownership and “social planning” there may be in a market economy, if production and investment decisions are all regulated by “the market”, they are still basically geared to employing workers to produce goods for sale at a profit on the market.  In regards to the labour if the products have to be sold on a market, and there is no market to sell more of that product, then its no good having the government telling a state-owned firm to hire more workers. Those workers might just as well be paid unemployment benefits direct - their services are not required. Labour power is a commodity that is purchased to produce other commodities for sale on the market.

The social revolution perceived by the radical reformists require the transformation of capitalist enterprises into cooperative worker-owned collectives which obviously involves far more than government decrees transferring ownership. It is also assumed that all problems of control would be resolved by decentralisation of authority. After all, the people in charge at the top are seen to be reactionaries, so the more room there is for localised units to determine their own affairs, the more chance there is to adopt more progressive policies. It is imagined that if everybody democratically discusses everything, production units will be able to exchange their products to supply each other’s needs, and to supply consumer goods for the workers, with no more than co-ordination by higher level councils of delegates from the lower level establishments. Actually any attempt to realise that vision would only mean preserving market relations between independent enterprises and not working to a common social plan. The concept has been accused by some critics as being  a sort of “parliamentary cretinism of the workplace” - the right to vote can not in itself transform bourgeois social relations into co-operative ones. Most workers expect to have bosses and within co-operatives there would be a tendency to retain or return to the old ways of doing things, with new bosses, in charge (or even back to the same old bosses!). Electing new bosses does not abolish the boss system.

Capitalist enterprises has always been based on  production for profit, and nobody actually has much experience in how to run it any other way. Indeed many people allegedly on the “left” seem to be unable to conceive of it being run any other way, and dream of somehow going back to a smaller scale of production, for it to be “more human”. The only real experience we have of socialised labour for the common good has been in a few “community projects” providing voluntary services to the public. Everything else is based on people working for wages under the supervision of bosses to produce commodities for sale on the market. All too often voluntary community projects  end up hopelessly inefficient and get entangled in factional disputes about who has the authority, in effect, who has the “ownership”. Then when they go under it reinforces the idea that capitalist production is the only system that can really work.

We should study the positive and negative lessons of the way small scale community projects and co-ops are managed, as well as studying capitalist management of big industry, in order to prepare for transforming the management of industry. The mentality that equates “popular”, “democratic” and “co-operative” with “local” or “community” projects is not just because we want to create some free space within which wage-slaves can manage some of their own affairs.  We want to overthrow slavery altogether.

If modern industry is to be run in a fundamentally different way, then essential policy and planning decisions to run it in that different way will have to be taken by some body. Whether they are called the workers council or the factory committee, or the cooperative guild, some body will have to take decisions about the sort of questions currently decided by the managing directors, CEOs and government departments. People will have to take decisions about questions which none of these bodies have the power to decide, since none of them controls the world market, either separately or together, such as in the issue of environment protection. No amount of elections from below or delegates consultations with the masses will change the fact that people will be responsible for the policy decisions in industry and will have to know what is happening. Nor would it change the fact that the appointees  are doing the job currently done by capitalists “bosses” and may develop into new bosses themselves (and bosses with wider and more totalitarian powers). This is where only a system of free access that deprives a section of the population of control of goods and services deprives them of the power to control.

The big issues are not decided “on the shop floor”, to use a phrase much loved by advocates of “self management”. Capitalism is already transferring more and more authority on the shop floor to workers themselves rather than supervisors or lower level line management as in so-called team-working. To combat climate change and create renewable sustainable energy sources, global decision-making is needed and we cannot all turn up at world conferences so we require accountable delegates. Socialism is about social control of production, not workers’control. Just saying “the workers will do it” does not solve a thing. Who are these workers who will do it after the revolution, without discussing what they will do, before the revolution? Slogans simply demanding a change in power because it is “more democratic” will get nowhere. The issue of “who decides, who rules” only arises in the context of “what is to be done”. Class conscious and politically conscious workers will be the ones discussing these problems beforehand, and if we do not have any ideas, how can we expect others to?

 A socialist revolution has the profound object of abolishing the ownership of wage-slaves by the master-class. A lot of production management has become a fairly routine function which could be readily taken over and transformed by workers’ councils. Workers should have no difficulty rapidly improving productivity over what can be achieved under a basically antagonistic system of “industrial relations” between hostile employers and employees.

The elimination of useless competition would save a lot of trouble, with unified marketing and supply arrangements under socialised planning. As the “market” is abolished, the supply function would become another aspect of production planning, rather than a separate problem of “marketing” and “pricing”.  Under capitalism there can be no substitute for the market in an economy based on commodity production. If social production is divided between separate enterprises with antagonistic interests, then they can really only be brought together through market exchange, the best measure of which is money prices. If instead they are brought together by some other form of external coercion, there will inevitably be some misallocation of resources because the quotas set do not exactly correspond to money – the only measure of social needs in a market economy. The socialist solution is to dissolve the antagonism between separate enterprises so that each is directly aiming to meet social needs, rather than responding in its own separate interests. The question of centralisation and decentralisation of enterprise management, is quite a separate question from abolishing commodity production.

Socialism does not imply the restricted range of products available any more than it implies the lower standard of living or longer working hours. There is no reason to anticipate major problems with the replacement of “commerce” by unified supply and marketing arrangements in advanced industrial countries.

If you flipped a switch and tomorrow every place was a co-op, we'd still all be competing with each other, just without bosses. The dizzying possibilities of broad social change that I imagined coming from democratic workplaces all over had been shown to have serious limitations. Even with bosses eliminated from the equation (what Marxists describe as "personifications of capital"), the logic of capitalism remained. Elected workers’ councils in capitalism behave in exactly the same manner as conventional enterprises of having to lay off staff, if there is no market for the goods they produce. Revolutionaries have to raise their sights above the blind workings of economic laws beyond our control because it leaves us, the workers, to enact the conclusions of capital on ourselves. In unprofitable years, if things got bad, we would be forced to fire ourselves, reduce health benefits, or cut our own wages or hours. Certainly we would have more say making those tough calls than if a manager were deciding those things for us and about us. But more say in the operations of capitalism is all that workers cooperatives can offer the working-class.

Worker co-operatives are a shuffling around of the roles that capitalism casts us in, and short-circuits the building of working-class confidence that comes when we confront capital together. Cooperatives in no way challenge capitalist markets, the drive for valorization, or the need to work for wages. I have never heard proponents of worker cooperatives, who believe they can end capitalism, satisfactorily explain how acting as a boss and a worker will challenge capitalist relations, except in the most superficial and rhetorical of ways (i.e. co-ops end hierarchies in the workplace and demonstrate that workers can run things, too).

The task of the Socialist Party is to uproot capitalist psychology from the minds of the workers. Why is the oppressed promised a paradise in the future? So as to blind them to the paradise which the capitalists build for themselves on this earth. It is the task of the Socialist Party to facilitate and to hasten the process of the liberation of the masses from the reformist illusions, to win the working class to the side of the class struggle.

The capitalist system has completely outlived its useful function. It is the system which puts profits above all other considerations. Capitalism offers no future to the people but recessions, wars, violence and a final plunge into barbarism. To avoid such a fate, workers must go into politics on their own account, independent of all capitalist politics to establish a society where the entire world will be united and planned on a socialist basis. This will bring universal peace—and undreamed of abundance for all people everywhere. The real upward march of humanity will begin. The working class can open up the way to this new world. They are the majority. They have the power and all that is necessary is for the working class to understand it—and to use it.

The crisis was world wide in its nature and in its devastating effects, although not uniform in its manifestations in the various countries. Before the economic upturn can be assured it is necessary for capitalism to restore confidence in the continuity of the process of reproduction. And since the realization of surplus-values provides the only inducement to what is popularly called the possibility of profitable investments the necessary steps are taken in that direction. It is accomplished by increasing the rate of exploitation of labour, lowering the cost of production, beginning with a low wage level, extending to the lengthening of working hours and increasing the speed-up of labour and of machine technology.  These are among the well known capitalist methods of revival. However, the process could not be set into motion entirely on its own accord. It needed the assistance of state intervention. On the one side were the measures of regulation of industry and finance and on the other the large scale government spending by way of subsidy to corporate enterprise. Freed from restraints employers lost no time in lengthening working hours, slashing wages and speeding up labor and introducing labour-saving technology in order to lower the cost of production. Finance capital has again strengthened its grip on the levers of production and distribution. Profits and dividends are on the rise once more in every field of activity. The main reason for the failure to reduce the number of unemployed is the increased application of new technology and diminishing number of workers employed compared to the total capital investments.

Capitalism has introduced a new form of want, want in the midst of abundance; a new torment of labor, the torment of workers deprived of work while there is an abundance of the means and objectives of working. Despite the so-called prosperity, capitalism is completely incapable of salving the problems of the world. There is the colossal wastage of armaments, and the insanity of national frontiers. Too often people forget the politician’s last lie almost before he invents another.

In socialism, we all shall benefit from the ready service of those who love work for its own sake. Their efforts will go directly to increase the common stock in which all will share.

What are profits

What is the source of profit? Its fundamental source is the labour of the workers. There is no emotional appeal in this assertion. It is simple fact. There is only one thing that diverse commodities, as different as chalk from cheese, have in common. That is that they are the products of human labour. They exchange in definite proportions. Even though in money terms the nominal magnitude of the exchange may be greatly enhanced by inflation, still the proportions in which commodities exchange against each other are definite. What determines the proportions is the amount of socially necessary labour time required for their production. So a pair of boots requires much less (socially necessary) labour time than a motor car. Accordingly the exchange of the two is represented by vastly different prices which reflect the different labour times socially necessary in their respective production.

Labour power is like every other commodity. It has a definite value. Its value, like all other commodities, is established by the amount of socially necessary labour time required in its production. Thus in capitalism the worker is paid fundamentally the amount needed to keep him and his wife and children alive. This is his wages. For wages he sells his capacity to labour to the factory owner. That capacity to labour as a matter of fact, as a matter of observation, exceeds in terms of time what is necessary to recoup the maintenance of the worker. In say 4 hours he produces the equivalent of his keep but in reality he works for 8 hours. The excess four hours belongs to the factory owner because for wages that owner has bought the worker’s capacity to labour. This is what Marx called surplus value. Surplus value is profit. In the capitalist process it undergoes distribution. That distribution can be quite complicated. Marx revealed that the value of labour power and the value produced by that labour power in the productive process are two entirely different magnitudes. The one magnitude is the value of the labour power, wages, the cost of production of the labour power of the worker, and the other the value produced by that labour power realised in the commodity produced. Labour power is the only commodity capable of producing a value greater than it itself has. It is the only source of profit. (“Value” increases in land etc. are not value in the scientific sense but a manifestation of the distribution of surplus value).

Profit is derived from unpaid labour time. Workers’ labour power is purchased on the market by the owners of capital.  Put to work, on average in half the working week, it produces values sufficient to cover wages to maintain a worker and family. The value produced in the remainder of the working week constitutes surplus value, the source of profit. he commodities produced by workers’ socialised labour are appropriated by capitalists. They will continue to be produced so long as they can be sold for profit on the market. The apparatus of state (the term “state” is used to describe public service, army, police, courts, gaols and not describe what are called States in Australia, for these States are provinces) maintains and enforces the system of exploitation.

 The total irrationality of this system is shown by the effect of technological advance. Technological advance under capitalism is dictated by competition for profit. Each capitalist strives to increase his production and reduce his labour costs. Hence today, computers displace large numbers of workers, cargo ships become container ships with mechanical loading and unloading, wheat, sugar, flour are loaded in bulk. So it goes on. The drive for profit and bitter competition leads one capitalist to improve technology; the other must follow or be ruined. Many are ruined and flung into the ranks of workers or unemployed.

When demand is great, profits are high. Production is stepped up. But the market is finite, limited. First it comprises these same workers. Their wages are basically determined according to the cost of production of their labour power, (that is, the amount necessary to maintain the workers and their families). Wages will vary above or below that according as the supply of and demand for workers vary, as the struggle of the workers for more wages keeps up wage levels a little, but the whole tendency of capitalism is to push wages down below subsistence level. By keeping them down the factory owners make more profit by the mechanism explained above. But by keeping wages down they contribute to restricting the very market upon which they rely to realise profit. Second, the market comprises all other sections of the population. Third, it comprises the outside world.  Each of these again is finite, limited. There is mad competition among the owners for profits by sale on the market. Sooner or later that market is glutted. This is so today. Motor vehicles cannot be sold, food is destroyed and so on. True, it is an uneven progress so that at the one time there may be excess of some goods and shortages of others. This arises from uneven development, uneven contraction of the market. The process takes place on a world scale. Re-division of the world constantly goes on.

It is inevitable that sooner or later these social conditions will impel people to organise to end the conflict between the socialised labour process and private ownership of the decisive means of production.  To camouflage and support the reality of ownership and non-ownership, of coercion to maintain it, there are many devices used by the owners of the means of production. It is not sufficient for the owners of the means of production to rely solely on coercion. It is necessary also to rely upon “public opinion”, to persuade a significant number of people that the social system, where ownership of the means of production is in the hands of a tiny minority and non-ownership is the fate of the vast majority, is desirable. Hitler’s Germany was the classic case of open resort to force to maintain private ownership of the means of production. Nonetheless Hitler relied also on “public opinion”, on deception. the ideology of the dominant class, of the owners, is put forward as the accepted ideology.  The class in control of ownership of means of production and the state apparatus imposes its thinking in many different ways, crude and subtle, open and insidious.

Names and terms have frequently given rise to disputes. Commonly the word “socialism” is used as a political trick. The Labour Party is called “socialist”. Obama is called a "socialist". It is suggested that countries with large welfare programmes are socialist or that nationalised industries are socialist. The word “reform” is heard more and more – “reform” of the economy, “reform” of industrial relations, “reform” of the way of government. If one accepts the theory of gradualism (reformism)—that socialism must come through the reform of prosperous capitalism—then of necessity one must agree to the measures to make capitalism prosperous as the necessary stepping stones to socialism. Otherwise, bang goes the theory. “Reform” never alters the fundamentals. “Reform” is just a manoeuvre to deceive people that these fundamentals can be altered. Reality is that their real nature will never change. This has nothing to do with genuine socialism as dealt with here.

With socialism, production takes place for people’s use.  A Socialist means a man or a woman who recognises the class war between the proletariat and the possessing class as the inevitable historic outcome of the capitalist system and of the direct economic and social antagonisms which it has engendered and fostered. And someone who sees that those antagonisms can only be resolved by the complete control over all the great means of production, distribution, and exchange, by the whole people, thus abolishing the class State and the wages system, and constituting a Co-operative Commonwealth or Socialism. The preliminary changes which must bring about this social revolution are already being made, unconsciously, by the capitalists themselves and socialists use political institutions and forms to educate the people and to prepare, as far as possible, peacefully for the social revolution, and holding that this great change should be completely democratic in every respect.

 Socialism arose because mankind had by the middle of the 19th century evolved through a succession of changes in the productive forces, these had given rise to corresponding changes in the relations of production, the shape of the real change (to socialism) could be seen within capitalism by the very process of socialised production and its contradiction with individual ownership. The  utopian Robert Owen advanced his “ideal” society in the early 19th century and first used the terms socialist and socialism.  Marx, and Engels deduced from their observation the general laws that governed social development. Their observation showed that the facts and the movement of those facts obeyed certain definite laws. These laws they discerned and expounded.  They showed that social change arose from changes in the productive forces. The very experience of workers of their exploitation in the socialised process of production educates them. Their education goes through various stages. They ultimately need and get socialist ideas. The theory of revolution arose from mankind's practice and summing up of that practice.

Money had arisen from the extension of trading several thousand years ago, its use as capital became possible. Merchants could add to their wealth by buying goods cheap and selling them dear; moneylenders and mortgage holders could gain interest on sums advanced on the security of land or other collateral. These practices were common in both slave and feudal societies.

But if money could be used in pre-capitalist times to return more than the original investment, other conditions had to be fulfilled before capitalism could become established as a separate and definite world economic system. The central condition was a special kind of transaction regularly repeated on a growing scale. Large numbers of propertyless workers had to hire themselves to the possessors of money and the other means of production in order to earn a livelihood.

Hiring and firing seem to us a normal way of carrying on production. But such peoples as the Indians never knew it. Before the Europeans came, no Indian ever worked for a boss, because they possessed their own means of livelihood. The slave may have been purchased, but he belonged to and worked for the master his whole life long. The feudal serf or tenant was likewise bound for life to the lord and his land. The epoch-making innovation upon which capitalism rested was the institution of working for wages as the dominant relation of production. Most of you have gone into the labour market, to an employment agency or personnel office, to get a buyer for your labour power. The employer buys this power at prevailing wage rates by the hour, day, or week and then applies it under his supervision to produce commodities that his company subsequently sells at a profit. That profit is derived from the fact that wage workers produce more value than the capitalist pays for their labour.  This mechanism for pumping surplus labour out of the working masses and transferring the surpluses of wealth they create to the personal credit of the capitalist was the mightiest accelerator of the productive forces and the expansion of civilisation. Capitalism has produced many things, good and bad, in the course of its evolution. The exploitation and abuses, inherent and inescapable in the capitalist organisation of economic life, provoke the workers time and again to organise themselves and undertake militant action to defend their interests.  The struggle between these conflicting social classes is today the dominant and driving force of world.

The aim of socialism is to introduce the rule of reason into all human activities. Under capitalism the wage worker is treated, not as a fellow human being, but as a mechanism useful for the production of surplus value. He is a prisoner with a lifetime sentence to hard labour. Compulsory labour is the mark of social poverty and oppression. When wealth of all kinds flows as freely as water and is as abundant as air and compulsory labour is supplanted by free time. When free time is enjoyed by all and has become as Marx suggested the true measure of wealth, this is the goal of socialism, and its promise.  

The Cheap and The Shoddy

From time to time various official bodies investigate social problems and come up with so-called solutions. Here is a recent example. 'The British Medical Association in Scotland is calling for integrated action to be taken to reduce the gap that exists between the health of those living in the poorest parts of the country and those in the more affluent communities.' (Times, 2 April) Despite the BMA's proposed pious "integrated action" as long as the class division between the working class and the owning class exists the workers will always suffer from the cheap and the shoddy whether it is in housing, education or even health treatment. RD