The Power of Our Vote

The right to vote is enshrined in The Universal Declaration of Human Rights. “The will of the people shall be the basis of the authority of government; this will shall be expressed in periodic and genuine elections.” It is a right that was hard won. Without question, the struggle for voting rights was a noble struggle and its achievements go beyond simply casting a ballot. Organising themselves and vigourously fighting for a political goal gave workers (and in particular women and blacks) a social and political presence that had been denied them for centuries. The struggle waged to win the vote set examples for those who wish to engage in political struggle, regardless of the cause. But the vote itself, what it literally meant, what it produced, who it benefited, what its value was to society in political and social terms was not submitted to careful study. And so it is conceivable that many of those who risked their lives to gain the right might now question the wisdom of relying upon such a system for selecting those who govern.

The fact that a people participates in electoral assemblies does not mean that they direct the government or that the class that is ruled chooses its own rulers. When we say that the voters ‘choose’ their representative, we are using a language that is very inexact. We end up voting for those who are pre-selected. The voter, for his vote to have meaning, ends up having to choose from among a very small number of contenders, the two or three who have a chance of succeeding, and the only ones who have any chance of succeeding are those whose candidacies are already championed by party committees and by lobby groups. The relative handful who are selected to speak for the citizenry are rarely, if ever, a random selection. They are rarely, if ever, representative of the population at large. And they are rarely, if ever, open to the wishes of their constituencies. Instead, those selected to speak for the citizens speak not for their constituency but for the organised minorities who put them in power, minorities with certain values in common, based on considerations of property and taxation, on common material interests, on ties of class.  If you are bold enough and fool hardy enough to try and run for higher office on an independent ticket you will have very limited press coverage and you will be denied access to televised debates. You will be sidelined in every way conceivable way as insignificant. The official election campaign is a travesty of democracy. Whatever the make-up of the next government, its agenda has already been determined. Finance capital, big business and the major parties agree that working people must be made to pay for the economic crisis that is not of their making.

What does the Socialist Party do? This can be ascertained from the practice of socialists around the world. While conditions differ from country to country, one common element is that socialists contend with the bourgeoisie in every place and in every way possible to win the hearts and minds of the working class, and challenge for political power. An important field of struggle is elections. Many dismiss running because socialist candidates cannot win. This is true, today. But we lay the groundwork for tomorrow, today. There is a distinction between running and winning. We know we can't win. But we know that by running we gain access to the notice of tens of thousands. At the hustings we can even confront the capitalist candidates directly. Elections are one of the best ways for socialists to get a public hearing. Elections should be seen as a great arena to publicise and populise socialist ideas. It is marvelously morale–raising to discover while canvassing that there are already a great many socialists out there, and many more potential socialists. It would be difficult to campaign for election without making new contacts, new recruits and increasing the working class' understanding of political realities and socialist ideas. Party members and volunteers grow immensely as speakers, and organizers. And voters are refreshed by real solutions. If we socialists don’t speak up for socialism in the electoral arena, who will? And if not now, when? The Socialist Party appeals to real socialists, those who, to quote the Communist Manifesto, “disdain to conceal their aims.” We take on those phony socialists who pin their hopes on backing capitalist reformers as a way to build for socialism. Why go south to reach the north. A socialist is not a member of, or supporter of, any capitalist party whatever. This is the first test of socialist seriousness and sincerity. The problem is this gives socialist cover to a capitalist party. For example, though the Greens may desire a kinder, gentler capitalism, the practical outcome of their dreams can be seen in Europe where they have been in coalition. Greens prosecute wars, impose austerity, and more. Why would socialists feed the Green Party’s false hopes that capitalism can be fixed?

The Socialist Party and its 10 candidates are alone in speaking for the working class and fighting for its interests in the 2015 election campaign. The working class cannot defend its independent class interests except through a complete political break with all the parties and organisations that defend the profit system—above all from the Labour Party. Workers must reject all forms of racism, nationalism and xenophobia, including the demonising of migrant workers and political refugees. The aim of our campaign is to develop a working class, imbued with socialist consciousness, and armed with the understanding that nothing less than the abolition of the capitalist profit system and the establishment of world socialism can provide a future for humanity as a whole; free of war, poverty and oppression.

Some on the Left are less than enthusiastic about throwing themselves into the battle for votes, not seeing the viability of change through elections. Their approach doesn't see the need for for elections relying more on the idea that radical change and the revolutionary transition to socialism will not occur via the electoral path but via a general strike during a crisis of capitalism. The capitalist state will be smashed in one blow and a “socialist state” established in its place through force and violence.  The Socialist Party has long argued against this mischaracterization and misrepresentation of socialist political action. Just like the socialist society we envision - peaceful, humane and democratic - so too must be the path as it will shape every aspect of the new society. Marx and Engels foresaw the possibility of peaceful transition particularly under conditions of the democratic or bourgeois republic. Engels wrote in Critique of the Erfurt Program:

"One can conceive that the old society may develop peacefully into the new one in countries where representatives of the people concentrate all power in their hands, where, if one has the support of the majority of the people, one can do as one sees fit in a constitutional way; in democratic republics such as France and the USA..."

The contest for power involves winning the ideological and political battle in civil society and the institutions of state as well, chief among them the democratic legislative arena. With the decisive conquest of political power, the working class will use this power to "wrest by degrees all capital from the bourgeoisie, to centralize all instruments of production in the hands of the state..." wrote Marx and Engels in the Communist Manifesto. The state it seems is not smashed but "reshaped" (in the words of Engels) in accordance with the balance of class and social forces from an instrument of class oppression and repression, into one of liberation. In the process the state is transformed, and the foundations are laid for its withering away. In this view, power is attained through democratic means, through the working class electing its representatives to legislative bodies and through political action, including strikes and demonstrations. Democratic institutions are transformed in the process - existing ones become more democratic and new ones arise to extend and deepen participation. Political power is wielded to transform the state apparatus at every level, curbing the capitalist power to restrict their ability to resist, obstruct and use violence against a revolutionary working class movement. Marx foresaw the possibility of achieving socialism through universal suffrage:

 "A historical development can remain 'peaceful only for so long as its progress is not forcibly obstructed by those wielding social power at the time. If in England, for instance or the United States, the working class were to gain a majority in Parliament or Congress, they could, by lawful means, rid themselves of such laws and institutions as impeded their development, through they could only do so insofar as society had reached a sufficiently mature development."

In Scotland our two branches have not got the necessary resources to stand any candidates in this coming election. Some voters will support the candidate who is the “least worst” until such a time “WORLD SOCIALISM!” upon your voting paper.

that there is a real candidate who truly represents us. In this election, the arguments don't pit capitalism against socialism. It's about trying to decide what kind of capitalism there will be – we have a choice of capitalisms. Sometimes not voting is the way to be heard yet non-voting is often indistinguishable from apathy. It sends no message at all. The only thing that can transform "apathy" into an actual political force is to organise the non-voters. This is why Socialist Party always advocate workers to vote even when there is no one to vote for. We suggest a spoiled ballot or as we describe it, a write-in vote for socialism. It may not help much – it might even seem to some just a pointless gesture — but at least it can’t hurt. Don’t degrade yourself by sinking to the “lesser of two evil” mentality. On this occasion, go to the polling-booth and inscribe

We Want Socialism

At the present time the vast majority of the working class of the world remain apathetic and distracted by the modern equivalent of "bread and circuses" (sport spectaculars and mindless television shows), involved with futile reform measures to make capitalism easier to live with or attacking one specific problem of capitalism rather than the system itself, overcome with cynicism against the human race, ignorant of a viable alternative to class rule, misinformed about the true nature of socialism and, ultimately, still loyal to capitalism. Many pretenders to the mantle of socialism have erroneously been connected with socialism by capitalist pundits in an attempt to discredit genuine socialism. The relatively very few socialists that now exist can only continue with their education and agitation, and hope that the vast majority of the working class becomes class-conscious and initiates an organised resistance to capitalism.

The Socialist Party support the establishment of an economic system that is not divided into two contending social classes; there would be no minority class that owns all the property involved with the production or distribution of the goods in society and which thereby forces the majority class to work for them in exchange for only a tiny fraction of the wealth, while the ruling class appropriates the lion's share for themselves simply because they own. The Leninist system of the former Soviet Union (as well as Cuba and China) do not fit the criteria of a classless society, as they too were/are divided into a tiny and very privileged ruling class that owns the industries and services, and a very large working class that does all of the labor in exchange for a very miniscule portion of the social wealth. No genuine socialist political party would support this system of "state capitalism", or refer to them as being socialist.

The Socialist Party advocates a system that functions without money; in other words, there would be no type of circulating currency as a means of exchange which can be used to purchase the means of production and distribution and be used by individuals for their own personal enrichment, and thereby acquire a disproportionate amount of the wealth in society, as under capitalism.

The Socialist Party does not stand for political office. This point cannot be emphasized enough. No true socialist party favors the continuation of the political state, or believes that the political state is anything other than an oppressive tool of a ruling class used to enforce class rule. All of the other parties of "socialism" favor the continuation of the political state, and foster the belief that the “workers” state can be goaded into administering society for the benefit of everyone. True socialists realize that the political state is not needed in a genuine socialist society, and agree that it only serves the interests of the ruling classes, and would not and cannot serve the interests of a classless society, and that the latter would be quite incapable of existing harmoniously alongside a coercive entity like a state.

Under capitalism, industry produces goods for the sole purpose of making a profit. Everything else takes a back seat to this profit motive. As a result, the most financially inexpensive methods of waste disposal will be used, as well as the most financially expedient means of controlling pests of crops. Thus, safer and less environmentally hazardous methods of energy production, such as solar and wind, are set aside in favor of financially "cheaper" fossil fuels. Nuclear power is  used in place of other sources that may be far safer, because the development of these safer sources would be more expensive from a "financial" standpoint (actually, under socialism, it's quite possible that nuclear power would be used in a safer and more responsible way than under capitalism).

To compound the problem is the fact that the vast majority of the people in a capitalist world, the working class, do not make production decisions. These are made by the capitalist class, and these decisions are made solely towards the goal of increasing corporate profits. These firms are each in vicious competition with each other, and they must outperform other businesses on the market or fold. Thus, safer but costly methods of waste disposal and safer energy sources, all of which are currently technologically possible, are too financially expensive to utilize. Hence, the needs of the corporate hierarchy come before the needs of the working class and the biosphere itself. Attempts by regulatory bodies of the capitalist government to control these abuses amount to almost nothing, since the capitalists are the ones who ultimately fund the nests of the politicians. As a result of the above, safe environmental measures aren't enforced.

Even worse, the working class is blackmailed into choosing between jobs or the environment, i.e., they are told that in order to bear the costs of implementing expensive safety measures for the safe disposal of waste, downsizing on jobs must occur. Faced with this Catch-22 situation, and being dependent upon the capitalist class for their wages, the working class usually decides to keep their jobs and pray that the resulting environmental damage won't destroy human life on the planet during their lifetime, or cause horrific outbreaks of cancer and other diseases on the next generation. We can only hope that things do not get too bad in the next few decades, and that the planet Earth will continue to be able to sustain us and to continue to protect us from the harmful radiation that the ozone layer normally keeps from hitting the Earth. Never is capitalism blamed for the problem. Instead, we are told that the causes are an unavoidable fact of living in an industrialized world.

In a socialist world, these problems would be entirely avoided under the new world economic order. Without profit as the determining factor of production, and since society and all of its industries would be based on cooperation and not competition, different industrial facilities would not be engaged in a mad competition to outdo each other. The concept of financial cost wouldn't exist; hence, any feasible method of containing waste would be enacted quickly and efficiently, with no need to worry about money. Also, since we would be collectively in control of the economy, rather than having the facilities privately owned and controlled, it would be easy for the working class to vote for technology and research to find safer methods of energy production. No longer would the human race be at odds with nature. We also wouldn't have to give up the benefits of advanced technology. Further, because we would not have an advertising market, we would not be constantly told that we need huge amounts of useless gimmicks and wasteful junk, nor would be compelled to purchase huge amounts of goods for the purpose of looking "wealthy" or to provide us with status symbols, since personal enrichment would no longer be a factor in the cultural mindset. All of the waste produced by capitalism, such as the plastic used to wrap items that is mostly only good for advertising, and the resulting garbage that it creates, would be eliminated. Thus, the high ecology advocates insistence on only "appropriate" technology being used would probably be fulfilled, for the most part. Most importantly, production under socialism would be geared towards meeting the needs of everyone, including the collective need for a healthy environment and a peaceful co-existence with the other life-forms on this planet, and not simply a privileged few need to make a profit.

Hence, the existence of the human race and its industrial society is not inherently at odds with the environment; only the continued acceptance of a socio-economic system based on production for profit is. Socialism can and must be established before capitalism brings our world into a second Dark Age.

The Socialist Party envision a future socialist society based on free access. In short, this simply means that workers will be allowed to take freely of the goods and services available to them, and in which they had a hand in collectively producing. Common sense will prevent over consumption, and due to the fact that we will be allowed to work at jobs which we have a natural interest and aptitude in, the enforcement of work entailed by labour vouchers will be seen as unnecessary. Therefore, free access consumption will not be based on how many hours we work, but on the self-defined needs of the individual. Of course, if we don't collectively agree not to over-consume, or if we collectively choose not to work, socialism in general, and free access in particular, will not work. However, since everybody in a socialist society will be working at jobs in which they have an aptitude for and personal interest in, and since work will encompass only a fraction of the time for each worker that it does under capitalism (with far more leisure time available to workers than under capitalism), the need for some medium to enforce work will be unnecessary. It is very possible that as technology continues to advance, and as production becomes more and more efficient over the course of time under socialism, it will become increasingly easier to produce what we need and want in greater abundance, making artificial limits on production for the purpose of limiting consumption and enforcing work to appear more and more absurd in the eye of the worker. 

The Socialist Party further describes what it perceives as the benefits of free access in the aforementioned section on its own site. Free access can basically be defined as no paper, plastic, metal or other physical medium of exchange necessary for taking goods and utilizing services. If we need a certain item from the store, we will simply walk in and sign it out of the inventory. Any type of barter in an advanced industrialised society is believed to be ludicrous by people who are aware of the material possibilities in an era of abundance which we live under today. In fact, it will be probable under a free access system that people will keep consumption in check by agreeing to share items in which we now purchase for every family, such as methods of transportation and home maintenance. As the some socialist writers point out, such household appliances such as lawn mowers, for example, will probably be shared by several families and future means of superior public transportation will lessen the demand for personal means of transportation, such as automobiles. Also, without the need for market hungry advertising, needs will not be created, and the demand for outlandish and unnecessary devices sold in abundance under capitalism will be seen as a waste of production under socialism.

The motto of socialism will be "from each according to his abilities, to each according to his needs."

Obviously, some who work more hours will take less goods, but they will not be concerned with how much his neighbor will be taking as long as he himself will be satisfied. Contrary to what capitalism attempts to teach us, to work is natural for people, it is only under capitalism that work becomes something which we are forced to do too often, or because we are forced to take a job that we hate, that makes people lazy and unwilling to work. Once doctors are allowed to practice medicine, gardeners are allowed to create beautiful floral gardens, chefs are allowed to cook, artists are allowed to draw, writers are allowed to write and engineers are allowed to design and advance technology, and work will be made interesting to everyone and controlled by the workers themselves, then people will gladly be willing to do the work society requires of them, with a lot less stress and a lot more cooperation between everyone, and we will probably not even see a well-defined difference between work and leisure that we see under capitalism today. It should be restated that work under socialism will be completely voluntary, and should have no need to be enforced as under capitalism. Goods must be free to all in addition to the required services, and since people will be able to work jobs in which they have a personal aptitude, work will be a pleasure under socialism, and not the unmitigated burden that people try to avoid under capitalism. Hence, virtually all individuals will be happy to do their share of the useful work required in society, and much leisure in which to enjoy it will be available (there is a saying that goes "those who love their occupation never work a day in their life", a saying very applicable to what our life will be like under socialism concerning our jobs).

No More Reforms...We Want Revolution

As Eugene V. Debs said, “Socialism will completely revolutionize the community life. For the first time in history the people will be truly free and rule themselves, and when this comes to pass poverty will vanish like mist before the sunrise.” As W.E.B. Du Bois said, “the emancipation of man is the emancipation of labor”.

The dream of liberty has persisted from the days of the slave revolts of Spartacus against their imperial masters through to the peasant uprisings against their medieval lords, to the strikes and bloody protests against the industrial barons. Socialist freedom is not something abstract, but something concrete and real that is ensured by providing for human need as the core motivator of society, not corporate greed as under capitalism. So no more homeless, no more hungry, no more desperation for work, no more people trapped in dead-end jobs, no more elderly people choosing between affording food or medication. The right to a life of human dignity, for all. Socialists want all people to enjoy in the fruits of humanity’s labour over countless generations and to be given the opportunities to freely add to those achievements as best they can. People will have the freedom to explore their interests and abilities; to paint, to write, to experiment, to study, to be creative and to develop as human beings.

The Socialist Party holds that capitalism is not worth reforming and that, in any case, it cannot be reformed so as really to improve the workers’ condition, or protect them from capitalism’s recurring depressions and wars, or from displacement by automation. Moreover, as long as workers are deluded by the hope of “improved conditions” under capitalism they will turn to whatever party they think can deliver the goods. And many of these parties are in the reform business precisely to divert the workers from a revolutionary socialist solution to their problems, and to preserve capitalism. Some reform parties denies they are reformist. Trotskyists attempt to disguise their reform demands as “partial steps” or “transitional measures.” They’re still reforms, though. They maintain that some kind of “socialism” is their objective but its realisation is not considered possible for an indefinite period in the future. For the present, they say, the thing to do is to work for measures that will allegedly alleviate the suffering of the workers.

The Socialist Party grasps the fact that revolutions are not made, but that they come, that capitalism itself is bound to create the revolutionary crisis that will ultimately set the working class into motion. It holds, therefore, that it is the duty of a bona fide party of socialism always to hold the issue of the abolition of wage slavery up before the workers clip and clear, and to expose reforms as delusions where they are not concealed measures of reaction. Those reformist parties claiming to be “socialist” have as their concept of socialism as one in which industry is nationalized and administered by the state. The Socialist Party agrees with Marx that “the existence of the state is inseparable from the existence of slavery.” When the state takes over all that really happens is that the workers, who remain wage slaves, exchange one master, the private capitalists, for another, the bureaucrat. This definitely is not socialism. In contrast to the “radical” reformist parties, the Socialist Party calls for abolition of the Only when the means of production are owned socially and administered democratically by the workers will we have genuine socialism.

Either the working class takes control of affairs out of the hands of the capitalist class, ends the system of capitalist private ownership, and rebuilds our society on the basis  of social ownership of the means of production, democratic management and  production for use; Or, as surely as night follows day, the capitalist system will lead us down the road to barbarism. The Socialist Party, therefore, calls upon workers to repudiate the parties of capitalism, and to support it for a socialist reconstruction of society. The goal of the Socialist Party is the common ownership by the people of the land and all the instruments of wealth production, and one in which the workers will manage democratically. To bring to birth this society of peace, abundance and boundless human happiness, the Socialist Party appeals to the working class to support the principles of the Socialist Party, and prepare now to help build the socialist ballot. Unite with us to end the social system that dooms us to a lifelong tenure of wage slavery, with unemployment, poverty and wars as inseparable and ever recurrent features. Unite with us to establish free access socialism.

Glasgow Day School

Glasgow Day School

Saturday, 2^nd May

1-5 pm

Hillhead Library,

Byers Road.

The world has a million or so multimillionaires with disposable wealth of over $7 million each. About 100,000 people have assets of over $50 million. A fifth of the UK population say they can barely get by financially. There is no difficulty in producing enough food for everyone on the planet and bad harvests are not the reason people go hungry.

The General Election: More Worthless Promises

Well, it’s Jackanory Time again, and politicians will be trying to outdo one another in the telling of tall tales. Most will publish more or less fanciful wish lists which are designed to encourage you to believe that they have the interests of “the people” at heart. But what people?You might ask? Most Politicians will say that they wish to serve the British people, but other will say that they wish to serve the Scottish people.

The truth is that whichever of these storytelling charlatans you vote for, it is the capitalist class whose interests will be served. You will not be served. Quite the opposite: you will continue to be wheedled, cajoled, herded and bullied into the labour market where you will continue to be enslaved so that your masters may continue to enjoy the fruits of your labour. That’s all capitalism can offer you!

Speaker: John Cumming, Glasgow Branch

Two Cheers for Democracy

Is one vote every five years really enough? What are the barriers to a real, participative democracy? How could decision-making be made genuinely democratic? And can we really cope without the market making decisions for us? We discuss some of the options from history, from around the world, and from deepest cyberspace. Those who benefit from the present system would have you believe there is no alternative. It helps them if you believe it - although it does nothing for you.

Speaker: Brian Gardner, Glasgow Branch

Why just fight austerity?

Consider the following: It was recently reported that the richest 85 people on the planet together control as much wealth as the poorest half of the world's population (which would be over three and a half billion people). This astonishing statistic reveals the extent of global inequality, which turns out to be even more extensive than most people realise. In this talk we shall look at how such inequality comes about and, making use of Wilkinson and Pickett's book The Spirit Level, on the social consequences of inequality. We shall also ask whether a more egalitarian form of capitalism is worth struggling for, and what the idea of equality in a classless Socialist world would involve.

Speaker: Paul Bennett, Manchester Branch

Admission Free. Questions and Discussion Welcome. Refreshments will be available during all intervals

Socialism Is For The Happy Life

Both detractors and some of its supposed proponents have made the name of socialism discredited. The word “socialism” conjures up images of gulags, purges and secret police. It’s not a hard thing to claim that the Soviet bloc were some of the least free places on Earth, requiring nothing short of a wall to keep people in them. The individual was, and continues to be in such countries as North Korea, nothing, with no liberties and no free life of their own. Stalin, purportedly said “Ideas are far more powerful than guns. We don't let our people have guns. Why should we let them have ideas?” It should be self-evident from reading this blog that we don’t want any part of such a system. What’s more, we do not consider it to be an example of socialism. The meaning of socialism has been twisted through the actions of a number of governments who claimed the title of “socialist”. The task now is to reclaim the real meaning of the socialism and what it is to be a socialist. Only through the free discussion of ideas can people fully educate themselves and develop their own consciousness. It is only with total political freedom can people then turn their political consciousness into radical action and self-organisation.

What is this thing they are fighting for, what is socialism? Many on the left and the right are convinced that it merely means state intervention into the economy. So everything from Sweden’s welfare system to ‘Obamacare” to Stalin’s five-year plans are suddenly given the title of “socialist”. But Marx and Engels would have mocked such ideas. Engels jokingly remarked in this regard that “of late, since Bismarck went in for state-ownership of industrial establishments, a kind of spurious socialism has arisen, degenerating, now and again, into something of flunkeyism, that without more ado declares all state ownership, even of the Bismarckian sort, to be socialistic. Certainly, if the taking over by the state of the tobacco industry is socialistic, then Napoleon … must be numbered among the founders of socialism.”

The state as a body ruling over society doesn’t equal socialism in any case, no matter how it describes itself. Socialism is about the democratic control of the community and the workplaces, the economy and the whole of society by the people who work it and live in it. Socialism is about the common ownership of all the material wealth of humanity so no person – whether capitalist or state bureaucrat – can use the privilege of ownership to control the lives of others. It means the end to both the rule of the tiny elite and the rule of impersonal market chaos. Socialism is about freedom for all from want. Or as Eugene Debs succinctly put it, “socialism means social ownership, cooperation, freedom and abundance for all”. Socialism is the final victory of democracy for it is the fulfillment of people’s sovereignty over their lives. An important part of the goal of socialism is the idea of planning. Human knowledge and reason are capable of consciously deciding what society needs and what to produce without having to rely on the blind forces of supply and demand of the market. Socialism means we have control over our destiny, to be able to consciously plan, to decide and to act, instead of being the victim of random chance.

Free association is the crux of the entire project. Socialism can only be the creation of the workers themselves, no one can do it for them or on their behalf. But once fought for, built and achieved, the returns for the individual is what’s important. Socialism is about maximising freedom for the individual, in the social context in which their needs are being met as a right. The working day would be shortened, as we would no longer have to support a class of capitalistic parasites on our backs, and people would have the freedom and leisure to explore their interests and abilities; to paint, to write, to experiment, to study, to be creative and to develop as human beings. Socialists want all people to enjoy in the fruits of humanity’s labour over countless generations and to be given the opportunities to freely add to those achievements as best they can. Variety and diversity of life is as much of an aim of socialism which aims to maximise the choices of lifestyle, work, ways of artistic expression for all, but all this only can be accomplished once we move beyond the confines and restraints put on us by the profit system.

We cannot say for certain what socialism will be like, or determine its every detail ahead of time. That is something for those who live in it to freely build for themselves. But we can say that people will be able to live their lives to their fullest only when they are not constricted by the worry and fear of paying the bills; students will be able to expand their intellectual horizons to their full potential when they are freed from a future of wage slavery; artists will be able to explore all their creativity when they are no longer dictated by the demands of the market. You cannot achieve true freedom for yourself and only yourself, all on you own. True freedom in the here and now under capitalism is largely an illusion, but we can gain glimpses of a free life when we struggle together and collectively resist oppression, exploitation and tyranny. Oppression, tyranny and exploitation can only breed resistance. We are all going to be free or none of us will. We live together, we work together, we fight together, we win together.

Socialism Is Better Than Capitalism

Members of our party have found themselves arguing about socialism and or Marxism, mostly trying to debunk the common misconceptions about our ideas. Growing numbers of people are concerned about the state of the world and the fate of the planet. Do things have to be this way? No, there is a real world alternative: socialism. But people are constantly bombarded with the message that socialism has failed and that capitalism is the best of all possible worlds. People has basically heard nothing else about socialism other than it is a nightmare. This rewriting of history has influenced many to think that as bad as capitalism is, any attempts to get rid of it will make things far worse. In a thousand different ways it is the message put out. There’s just one problem. This conventional wisdom about socialism is not true. It is built on the wholesale distortion where lies and slanders are repeated endlessly and become accepted as self-evident truth. It's quite amazing how well-educated folk who pride themselves on intellectual rigour and honesty have been fooled.

Almost always the first point to be made when discussing anything to do with socialism is someone will mention “Look at the Soviet Union that was a totalitarian state, millions died and their economy was all awful” First thing that has to be said here is that socialism is a stateless classless society. So did the Soviet Union possess a State? Yes, it did. Therefore was it a socialist society. No. What we saw in the Soviet Union was state capitalism. In one sentence instead of the capitalist class exploiting the Workers, the state and its bureaucracy exploited the workers.

Something which is almost bound to come up is then the argument that greedy selfish aggressive human nature makes it impossible for people to live peacefully in a well-ordered society of sharing. Human nature (human behaviour to be more exact) adapts to the social structures we create. In essence humans create human nature and can, with the right social structures, manipulate it to create a better world for everybody.

The key socialist idea is that the workers will rise up and overthrow the capitalists. We still have not seen this world revolution. However, it worth keeping in mind that one possible explanation is the massive rise in the power and size of the state that was seen in the 20th century. The state is the mitigating force of class warfare and reduced the chances for revolution.  It is worth noting here that firstly; revolutionary change does not always involve hanging the politicians from the lamp-posts but can occur in more civil ways depending on the situation. That said when one is unable to feed their family we are told we are only a dozen meals away from rebellion. The capitalist system thrives of exploitation and we are beginning to see once again capitalism’s more brutal face.

But we can change the system from within many still persist in pleading and is often put forward by those who support mainstream political parties such as the Labour PartyThe difficulty here is that you are effectively trying to hold back the tide by being reformists. To make the necessary changes to society to restructure capitalism from the capitalism state would take many governments and would undoubtedly lose favour with businesses likely resulting with the loss of the next election and any work being undone.  If a party had enough support to get through using capitalist democracy then they would have enough support to have a peaceful revolution which would be much quicker and much more effective. The main goal of socialists is to show that capitalism is inherently flawed. Capitalism creates crisis and inequality and that to tackle this is to tackle capitalism at its heart. The need to make profit creates exploitation and classstruggle, the need to out compete competitors creates market crises, the division of Labour produces alienation. All of this is what socialists aim to show.  Capitalism is a bad idea in theory and in practice. It relies of exploitation, it creates political division, it alienates workers from their labour, it is unstable and creates a society where it is not the people who are Sovereign but Capital who is. Socialism is a solution to these problems. We cannot retain the Capitalist system and survive as a civilization.  We must fight against it, however, to do so, first require knowledge of what is wrong with capitalism, what are its faults, and what we want in its place. To obtain this we need to think, analyse and debate, to create a society better for all. There are people hankering for an alternative to this system. Who want to do something meaningful for humanity with their lives. Humanity can move beyond exploitation and social division. It can move towards a classless society and a world of freely associating human beings—socialism. This is what revolution is about. Socialism is more relevant than ever.

Socialism is not a big welfare state that looks after people. It is not the old capitalist economy simply taken over by a state. Imagine, instead, people consciously learning about how to transform the world, no longer shackled by the chains of tradition and ignorance, seeking a culture where people not only cooperatively work to produce the necessities of life, but have fun doing it, where the scientific outlook mingles imagination, strengthening and inspiring each other, where people interact with each other based on mutual respect, concern, and love for humanity. It is about unleashing the creativity and initiative of those who had been on the bottom of society. World socialism cares about and takes care of the environment. That is socialism, a worldwide society—and it is yet to be achieved—in which all classes and class distinctions have been overcome; all systems and relations of exploitation abolished; all oppressive social institutions and relations of social inequality, like racial discrimination and the domination of women by men, put an end to; and oppressive and backward ideas and values cast off. Socialism is a world of abundance, where people together hold all of society's resources in common. A socialist world is not some sort of wishful and airy dream or utopia. The development of human society has brought humanity to this historic threshold. The productive forces of society—not just machinery, equipment, and technology but also people and their knowledge—have developed to a level that can allow humanity to overcome scarcity, to provide for people's basic material needs, and beyond that to have a large surplus left over to devote to the all-around and future development of society. The socialist revolution establishes a new economy based on social ownership of the means of production and social planning; on people cooperating to solve problems and to meet social need; and with a whole new set of economic and social priorities. Socialism is a moneyless society based on the free access to the wealth of the world.

Socialism Is The Future, The Future Is Ours

The first condition of success for socialism is that its adherents should explain its aim and its essential characteristics clearly, so that they can be understood by everyone. We must do away with many misunderstandings created by our adversaries (and even some created by ourselves.) Socialism was born in 19^th century Europe as a movement of protest against the problems inherent in capitalist society.

The main idea of socialism is simple. Socialists believe that society is divided into two classes by the present form of property-owning, and that one of these classes, the wage-earners is obliged to work for the other, the capitalist, in order to be able to live at all. Workers effectively possess nothing. They can only live by their labour-power and since, in order to work, they need an expensive equipment, which they have not got, and raw materials and capital, which they have not got, they are forced to put themselves in the hands of another class that owns the means of production, the land, the factories, the machines, the raw material, and accumulated capital in the form of money. And naturally, the capitalist, the possessing class, taking advantage of its power, makes the working and non-owning class pay a large forfeit. It does not rest content after it has been reimbursed for the advances it has made, and has repaired the wear and tear on the machinery but continues to extract a surplus from the workers – which is their profit and supposed reward for being employer. A worker can neither work, nor eat, clothe or shelter him or herself, without paying a sort of ransom in the form of sweat and toil to the owning capitalist class. All this misery and injustice results from the fact that one class monopolises the means of production and of life, and imposes its laws on another class and on society as a whole. The capitalist wage slavery relationship inflicts a physiological effects, conditioning the working class to a submissive mentality in the workplace.  This submissive mentality then manifests into passive behaviour in the political lives of the working class.

Socialism aims to liberate the peoples from dependence on a minority which owns or controls the means of production. It aims to put economic power in the hands of the people as a whole, and to create a community in which free men and women work together as equals. Socialism seeks to replace capitalism by a system in which the public interest takes precedence over the interest of private profit. We, in the Socialist Party appeal to all who believe that the exploitation of one person by another must be abolished. Socialists aim to achieve freedom and justice by removing the exploitation which divides men under capitalism and strive to build a new society in freedom and by democratic means. Without freedom there can be no socialism. Socialism can be achieved only through democracy. Democracy can be fully realised only through socialism. One man is a master and the other a wage slave, one enjoys riches and the other obeys order, no amount of purely electoral machinery on a basis of 'one man one vote' will make the two equal socially or politically. Elections have become beauty contests between "charismatic" leaders struggling to attract the attention of the electorate in order to implement policies constituting variations of the same theme: maximisation of the freedom of market forces. There is little better description of democracy as the one that declares it to be the government of the people, by the people, for the people. While the guiding principle of capitalism is private profit the guiding principle of socialism is the satisfaction of human needs. Planning in socialism does not mean that all economic decisions are placed in the hands of the state or central authorities. Economic power should be decentralised wherever this is compatible with the aims of planning. The workers as the producers must be associated democratically with the direction of their industry.

The ecological crisis is the direct result of the continuing degradation of the environment that the market economy and the consequent growth economy promote. Humanity is faced with a crucial choice between two different proposed solutions, what we can call the "conventional environmentalist" and the "eco-socialist ". The green movement has lost much of its radical potential by being integrated into the existing social system and is engaged with those in the corridors of power to enact legislative palliatives. Another section with an almost irrational mystical approach to the ecological problem prefer a strategy of lifestyle changes, building "communes", food co-ops etc., instead of a direct challenge on the political field. However, this approach, although helpful in creating an alternative culture among small sections of the population and, at the same time, morale-boosting for those who wish to see an immediate change in their lives, does not have any chance of success ―in the context of today's huge  dominance of capitalism. The fact that the main form of is economic power, and that the concentration of economic power involves the ruling elites in a constant struggle to dominate people and the natural world, goes a long way toward explaining the present ecological crisis. To understand the ecological crisis we should consider the capitalist production relations. The eco-socialist solution seeks the causes of the ecological crisis in a social system that is based on the economic exploitation of human by human and not just mankind’s endeavours to dominate nature. If capitalism can’t be reformed to subordinate profit to human survival, what alternative is there but to move to some sort of globally planned economy? Our present political  leaders can’t help but to choose to  make wrong, irrational and ultimately  suicidal decisions about the economyand the environment. Socialism is an attempt to provide an alternative to what Marx called capitalism’s ‘destructive progress’. Capitalism can never be made to serve the common good and so for the sake of social harmony and ecological sustainability we must look to an alternative system altogether.

The Death Industry

Even we in the Socialist Party can admire Nicola Sturgeon’s spirited condemnation of the Trident Missile Programme and agree with her that it should be scrapped. However, in her emotional speech for the bairns and not the bombs she failed to chastise the rest of the arms trade that her government actually fosters and nurtures as the profitable part of the Scottish economy. This blog has already reported on the Glasgow Council pension scheme investing tens of millions in the weapons industry. What's the link between Edinburgh and drones, or Ayrshire and the teargas turned on democracy protesters in the Middle East? What does Dundee have to do with the repression in Bahrain? You guessed. Scottish companies are making cash from supplying weapons. The arms trade is a deadly, corrupt business. It is responsible for supporting, and profiting from conflict. Its customer base largely consists of human rights abusing regimes all over the globe.

In 2013 weapon manufacturers worth £1.8billion and employs almost 13,000 people and 30 Scottish arms trading companies attended that year’s showpiece arms fair the Defence & Security Equipment International (DSEI), which is heavily subsidized by the UK government.

Many of the biggest firms are marine companies which are involved primarily in naval defence. BAE Systems in Glasgow builds warships including the Type 45 destroyers. Rosyth-based Babcock Marine is helping to build the UK’s new Queen Elizabeth Class aircraft carriers. Some of the companies in Scotland are domestic while others are outposts of international firms such as QinetiQ, Raytheon, Thales and Finmeccanica. 

Finmeccanica is the world’s eighth largest defence contractor and is part-owned by the Italian government. Its subsidiary, Selex Galileo in Edinburgh, is heavily involved in high-tech aviation research for the Eurofighter, SAAB Vixen and the F-35 Joint Strike Fighter. The Campaign Against Arms Trade (Scotland) say that Finmeccanica has supplied drones to Pakistan, howitzers to Nigeria and helicopters to Algeria, Libya and Turkey.

Working Shortage?

Toronto Hydro is laying off almost two hundred workers as it struggles to trim $20 million in costs. John Camilleri, head of C.U.P.E. Local One, told demonstrators that cuts are raising questions about whether there will be enough staff left to do the work, " There's no shortage of work. In fact, there is a back-up of maintenance work to be done." So workers are being laid off when there is plenty of work to keep them busy. One thing about capitalism – it's so so logical. John Ayers.

Dear Humanity…

It's time to talk about what's next. It's time to talk about the alternative. It is time to promote real solutions and a radical transformation. It’s time for system change. The time has come for socialism. Capitalism is ignoring the needs and well-being of people, communities and the planet as a whole. It is time to explore a genuine new economic model and move our world to a very different place, one where outcomes that are truly sustainable, equitable, and democratic are commonplace. Now is the time to shift the political discourse about the future away from narrow debates over reform policies that do not fundamentally alter any significant part of the nature of the political-economic system itself. The Socialist Party must bring people together who are serious about really tackling the system question, about building a new system of society and re-defining the public debate. We believe there are grounds for optimism that revolutionary change is possible.

For many political activists it is getting harder and harder to be an optimist and a deep cynicism has grown about the prospects of ending the capitalist system and establishing socialism. In an age of unprecedented technological promise, politics has failed to keep up with this progress. For sure there is no shortage of people today to tell us that something is wrong, but there does exist a dearth of real ideas about removing the many problems we all face each and every day around the globe. There are many diagnoses of our social ills but few remedies offered. Any proposals  for actually changing the system are treated as impractical or a distraction from “immediate” demands. We are told that it can only be capitalism as usual as our only option right now and that a viable, plausible alternative system is not yet possible. But people are beginning to stir and imagine a different world to this one. They are starting to realise that without another type of society they may not have a future.

We live in a time of crisis, a time when millions of people across the world are victims of capitalist policies of war, exploitation and oppression, and destruction of the natural environment. There is renewed interest in the idea of socialism; a system based on common ownership of the means of production, rather than private ownership. But what do genuine people find when they try to investigate this revolutionary alternative? They find that all sorts of people, including political organisations and the governments of various countries, proclaim themselves to be ‘socialist’ without ever really defining what is meant by the term. There might be some vague and incomplete references to the wealth and resources of society being used for the benefit of all the people rather than a privileged minority, but not much else, and rarely, any strategy of how to achieve this. There is a lot of confusion and misunderstanding about what “socialism” means. For those who are not familiar with it, let’s get one misconception out of the way right at the start. Socialism, as we use the term, never existed in Soviet Russia, even before Stalin, or in China, even under Mao. Socialism also is not the same as the “social-democratic” capitalism that exists in Scandinavia and the” welfare states” in some other parts of Europe today. None of them conforms to the definition of socialism that we use. Their concepts of ‘socialism’ can mean anything from mildly reformist liberalism to state ownership and the nationalisation of water, gas and electricity, through to total state-capitalism. None of these have much at all to do with the genuine socialism that we are talking about, but are used to confuse and mislead the people, and hence to deflect interest away. 

Any attempt at defining socialism is dismissed on the grounds that we can’t predict the future and that a blueprint cannot be imposed. Since nobody is going to argue with that, it just closes off any discussion of the subject, leaving ‘socialism’ as a pie-in the-sky vision somewhere in the distant future. It also leaves the opportunists and pragmatists free to vacillate and somersault through various policies and tactics with no goals other than a ‘pragmatic’ and resigned critique of capitalism. We believe the fundamental principles of socialism and their universal application can be clearly defined without prescribing a blueprint for the form of their application in any country.

The Socialist Party is committed to the emancipation of working people everywhere. We believe that capitalism is an anarchic and crisis-ridden economic system based on production for profit. We are for the expropriation of the capitalist class and the abolition of capitalism. We are for its replacement by socialist production planned to satisfy human needs. It is becoming increasingly apparent that only a socialist rationally planned society can make the changes in our production and use of energy and resources that are essential to prevent, or at least mitigate, catastrophic climate change and other environmental degradation.

Socialism, as we envision it, is an economic system under which all natural resources, as well as all means of producing goods and of organizing the delivery of services, will be owned in common and democratically managed for the benefit of the society as a whole. Communities within a socialist system will take full responsibility for meeting everyone’s fundamental needs – food, clothing, shelter, health care, education, transportation, a healthy eco-system, access to cultural and recreational resources.  Rational planning, not competition for profit, will drive the allocation of resources, with the goal of meeting the needs of society as a whole. Under capitalism, advances in technology are used to replace workers, so that the wealthy owners of large enterprises can increase their profits, while the displaced workers are thrown out on the street and left to fend for themselves. In socialism, by contrast, advances in technology – intelligently designed and environmentally sustainable – will be planned and implemented so as to reduce the level of human drudgery. Advances in productivity will result in reducing the length of the work week and raising the standard of living for everyone, rather than enriching a privileged elite. Everyone will reap equal benefits from, and thus have an equal stake in, improving the way goods and services are produced and distributed. Everyone will enjoy a decent standard of living, and an opportunity to enjoy the richness of life. As machines and technology replace more and more manual labour and routine chores, people will be freed to devote more time to leisure pursuits such as recreation, creative endeavors, and social relationships. Meanwhile, better education, improved technology, humanely and democratically operated workplaces, a shorter work week, and an emphasis on cooperation will all combine to make work a more rewarding, less stressful experience. Under these circumstances, people will understand that everyone who is able to do so must work, and few (if any) will be reluctant to make their appropriate contribution to society in this way. All workers – not just those in a few lucky professions – will be motivated by a positive desire to help others, rather than by the need to avoid hunger and homelessness.

Bairns Not Bombs - An Infantile Protest

NATO = NAZI

Thousands of protesters marched through Glasgow city centre for anti-Trident speeches by the SNP leader, Nicola Sturgeon and Patrick Harvie, of the Scottish Greens, in George Square. Also addressing the gathering was Labour's North Ayrshire candidate Katy Clark, Cat Boyd, from the Radical Independence Campaign, and Ann Henderson, of the STUC. It is the annual rally organised by the Scrap Trident group will be followed on April 13 by a blockade of Faslane naval base, home of the UK's nuclear deterrent. We, of course, accept that most of the protestors are well motivated, that they care. But actions if they are to be effective require more than fine sentiments and sensibilities. It is not enough that behaviour is well meant: if it is to be effective it must be appropriate. If the anti-Trident campaigners really cared about people they would seek to campaign for their enlightenment; for an absence of nuclear weapons and war—in a word, for socialism.

Since it was founded in 1958, CND has seen the number of nuclear weapons in the world multiply hundreds of times over, but it has consistently refused to discuss what actually causes wars. When people really start to escape from the fears and prejudices that plague well-intentioned bodies such as CND, it will not just be just a matter of ‘'Scrap Trident’; it will be the end of all wars and of the economic rivalries between national ruling classes that cause them. If you are opposed to war and all that it represents—as any right thinking person should be—you will advocate policies and take actions which will make war impossible, by removing its causes. That is, you will seek to transform society in the interests of human beings as a whole. But to do what the SNP and the Greens do — to object to some weapons which might be used in wars, whilst implicitly tolerating others — is to accept the inevitability of war, and the social system which underpins it. Their efforts, because they oppose only certain kinds of war, and not war itself, serve, whether intentionally or otherwise, to make war more likely.

Campaigning against nuclear weapons is an irrelevance. Nuclear weapons are unlikely to be used in Syria, or central Africa, or any of the other myriad "trouble spots" across the globe. Tens of millions of people have been killed and not from a nuclear weapon. Are those anti-Trident campaigners unconcerned about such matters? By what contorted logic does "manner of death" come to mean more to them than "fact of death"? Can we challenge the SNP to close down the armament manufacturers and arms traders in Scotland.

Under capitalism we have a world which is divided into rival and competing nations, which struggle with each other over the control of markets, trade routes and natural resources. It is this struggle which brings nations into armed conflict with each other because militarism is the violent extension of the economic policies of propertied interests. War and the nuclear threat cannot be isolated from the economic relationships of production or the general object of capitalist production, which is to advance the interests of those privileged class minorities who monopolise the whole process of production. It follows that no working class of any country has any stake or interest in war, and we have always said that workers should never support war. Our stand since we were established has been to oppose every war. Armed with this understanding of the cause of war we are committed to working politically with workers of all countries to establish world socialism, because that is where the interest of the working class lies. The Socialist Party has never participated in the hideous cause of capitalism at war.

We have from those opposed to Trident this indignation about the effects of war, and some sort of policy, argued around some slogans, which aims to bring pressure to bear on governments to prevent them from producing nuclear weapons and to make them dismantle existing stocks. This superficial approach cannot possibly succeed, nor does it stand any chance whatsoever of guaranteeing a world free from war or the possible use of nuclear weapons. The superficial approach assumes some general democratic political structure by which populations are able to bring effective pressure to bear on governments conducting a policy of, or preparations for, war. But wars are not planned or conducted along democratic lines. Think back to the last war and the development of nuclear weapons. These things were done in complete secrecy. All governments, in the planning and conduct of war, must retain for themselves a free hand, which is secret, and by its nature without democratic reference to the population at large. Democracy and the conduct of war are anathema to each other. The first casualty of war is democracy.

Socialists have fewer illusions than anybody about capitalism and we are well aware of the dangers. The spectre of nuclear Rrmageddon has once again reared its ugly head as the EU and the US bluff and counter-bluff with Russia in the stand-off over the Ukrainian civil war. If movements continue to support capitalism they must be responsible for all the ways in which capitalism develops. Because capitalism cannot be controlled in the human interest, we do not know all the ways in which it will develop. 

Sincere individuals are swept up by movements such as the no-nuke campaigns but these movements have no substance and are not acting with a clear understanding of the nature of the problems. It would be churlish of us to ignore the contribution of public protest and demonstrations in raising public awareness of the nuclear issue. Sometimes it is forgotten how deeply limited public knowledge of the facts there is. The real disappointment is that comparatively few on the march will move beyond the optimistic (but narrow) objectives embraced by the organisers.

This is socialism

It must not be assumed that the political parties all over the world which call themselves Socialist advocate socialism. That is not the case. You probably think you have some idea of what you believe socialism is. Socialism happened years ago led by men in cloth-caps and overalls who still believe in it. Or, socialism is this nice idea about equality that never worked. Or, socialism was a terrible one-party dictatorship. Let’s explain what socialism is because socialism means different things to different people. Ed Miliband and Stalin, for instance, have said they’re socialists. Both, of course, are lying. Socialism does not mean what its enemies and critics says it does. The rich and privileged oppose socialism, because it would take away their power and make them our equals.

Socialism means the common ownership by all the people of the factories, mills, mines, transportation, land and all the other instruments of wealth-production ad that does not mean nationalization and state ownership. In the 1870s, Engels noted,

“Since Bismarck went in for state-ownership of industrial establishments, a kind of spurious socialism has arisen, degenerating, now and again, into something of flunkeyism, that without more ado declares all state ownership, even of the Bismarckian sort, to be socialistic. Certainly, if the taking over by the state of the tobacco industry is socialistic, then Napoleon and Metternich must be numbered among the founders of socialism.”

Socialism means production of things to satisfy human needs, and not, as under capitalism, for sale and profit. Socialism means free access to and democratic management of the industries by the workers. Capitalism gives to the owning class the terrifying power to hurl millions upon the mercy of charity food-banks with a stroke of the pen. Socialism destroys this despotic power, and creates an economic foundation for complete democracy. Socialism is the exact opposite of capitalism. In socialism, every man carries an equal burden of work and shares equally in the good things that society has to offer. There is no poverty, because all the idle land and machines have been put to use to produce the things people want. Production is aimed at satisfying the needs of the masses rather than the profit interest of a few. There is no unemployment, because a plan has been created to put everyone to work. Illiteracy is soon abolished, and the diseases that plague people are reduced to the few for which advanced medicine has not found a cure. Each individual is given the chance of developing himself to the fullest, with everyone helping him in whatever way they can.

For you, as an individual, socialism means a full, happy and useful life. It means the opportunity to develop all your faculties and latent talents. It means that, instead of being a mere chattel bought and sold in the labor market, an appendage to a machine, an automaton, a producer of wealth for the aggrandisement of idlers, you will take your place as a human being in a free society of human beings, and a participant in its administration. Your job inside socialism will not be dependent on the caprices either of a private employer or the capitalist market. It will be possible to go beyond market incentives and reward people not in accordance with their individual contribution, but in accordance with what they need to flourish. When things are produced to satisfy human needs, instead of primarily for sale and profit, involuntary idleness will be an impossibility. The "demand," instead of being limited to what people can buy, will be limited only to what people can use. Nor will technological unemployment be possible with socialism. Instead of kicking workers out of their jobs, the improved methods and facilities will kick hours out of the working day. "Jobs for all" under capitalism is a hypocritical slogan, except possibly when capitalism is preparing for, or engaged in, an all-out war. Socialism alone can give jobs for all and open wide the doorway to economic opportunity. Your hours of work in socialism will be the minimum necessary to fulfill society's needs. Work is not the end and aim of man's existence; it is the means to an end. We do not live to work; we work to live. Socialism will, therefore, strive in every way to lighten the labor of man and give him the leisure to develop his faculties and live a happy, healthful, useful life. It was estimated two decades ago that with the facilities then in existence, by the elimination of capitalist waste and duplication, and by opening jobs at useful work to all who were deprived of them, we could produce an abundance for all by working four hours a day, three or four days a week, and thirty or forty weeks a year.

Workers can no longer be held to the word of command of a few leaders and the socialisation of the means of production cannot be the work of a masses led by a few. If our goal is to preserve the existing system for as long as possible, we have no hope to create a movement to replace it. The choice we face is a stark one. The choice between a world of poverty, exploitation and war, and a world of democracy, equality and plenty. Workers, mustered under the red banner of socialism, have the power to bring this whole wretched capitalist system down.

The Socialist Party is unlike any other political party. We believe that a new society must be organised and built that can serve the interests of the true majority; the working class. The Socialist Party is committed to break the grip of the industrial and financial barons that lords it over society and instead bring genuine power to the people through community control of neighbourhoods and cities, going hand-in-hand with workers’ self-management of production. Either we as a people continue down the unsustainable path of upholding capitalism’s callous disregard and neglect of human and environmental needs; or, we as a people seek out and develop a new vision for the world in which we live. The Socialist Party works today for a world without war, without poverty, without discrimination or chauvinism, without fear and desperation. Working people are now rejected the “politics as usual” of the mainstream political parties. They have done this by “voting with their feet” in their majority, and not casting ballots in recent elections. We believe they are ready for a fundamental change of direction in society, and are willing to place their trust in a movement of working people. We teach the way forward towards a new society of freedom and equality, and lay the basis for taking those decisive steps into a new tomorrow – a socialist tomorrow; a tomorrow where a completely way of doing things will be created by working people; of democratic assemblies, of recallable workers’ delegates and direct mass democracy wherever possible where workers will take possession of the means of production and distribution, and institute a democratically planned economy to meet the needs of all.

Socialists oppose the false principle of the survival of the fittest, and believe that human survival and social development can best be secured through co-operation among individuals and groups to their mutual benefit. We say that the emancipation of the working class must be the work of the workers themselves. The working class and the employing class have nothing in common. There can be no peace so long as hunger, want and boredom are found among billions of working people and the few, who make up the employing class, have all the good things of life. Between these two classes a struggle must go on until the workers of the world organize as a class, take possession of the means of production, abolish capitalism and the state, and live in harmony with the Earth. Socialism means the common ownership of the means of production and the free association of producers. The implementation of anarchism can only be through the free federation of productive and communal organisations.

Marx and Engels criticised utopian socialists for having no contemplation of the huge forces within capitalism and of having little idea of the means and methods of achieving their “utopias” except by appeals to the heart. And like these early unrealistic utopians, some contemporary activists think it possible to create in the midst of capitalist society a microcosm of an essentially non-capitalist society such as co-ops - which it is hoped might spread by example. Some social democratic attempt to create capitalism with human and ecological values and these too are unrealistic, and destined to go nowhere. However many consider visions of the future as vital to the health of the socialist movement. They give constant inspiration, hope and direction to those engaged in what is still a long struggle.

The Gun-Runners in Glasgow

Glasgow City Council’s Strathclyde , Scotland’s most substantial local authority pension scheme,  has been sharply criticized for investing £83 million in 11 of the world’s biggest arms firms.

At the close of 2014, the fund had shares amounting to £19.6 million in Lockheed Martin and Boeing – two of the biggest arms manufacturers on the planet. Lockheed Martin, one of the Strathclyde Pension Fund's leading benefactors, produces military aircraft, armored ground vehicles, missiles, unmanned systems for air and naval systems. It exports arms to states across the globe, including Israel and Bahrain. Boeing is the world’s leading aerospace firm, and the largest producer of military aircraft and commercial jetliners in the world. Its aircraft have been deployed in military campaigns in war-torn states such as Israel and the Palestinian Territories, Iraq, Afghanistan and Libya.

 Other leading arms firms invested in by the fund include Safran (£17.2 million), Honeywell (£16.4 million), United Technologies (£7.1 million) and Raytheon (£2.3 million).

Honeywell manufactures technology used in combat aircraft, tanks and the Reaper drone, deployed by the CIA and various states to conduct strikes worldwide. According to UK think tank Drone Wars, the US is the most prolific user of this unmanned aerial vehicle, and has used it to target and kill numerous people in Pakistan and Yemen.

 Raytheon makes the Reaper drone’s targeting system. The firm has also been linked to manufacturing components for bombs deployed in the 2014 Gaza conflict. Margaret Curran MP, shadow secretary of state for Scotland, was seated at Raytheon's table in February at a glitzy arms banquet in Westminster, according to UK charity Campaign Against Arms Trade (CAAT).

United Technologies produces aircraft, drones and helicopters, including the Eurofighter Typhoon, Lockheed Martin’s F-35 and the Northrop Grumman Global Hawk. In 2012, it pleaded guilty to the “illegal export to China of US-origin military software used in the development of China's first modern military attack helicopter,”CATT says.

Safran specializes in aerospace equipment, as well as defense and security-related weaponry and technology. It manufactures drone technology, air-land systems, biometric identification systems and more.

Glasgow City Council’s pension scheme is one of the world’s largest, boasting total assets in excess of £13.9 billion. It pays 70,000 Scottish pensioners, and has an additional 130,000 people either waiting to retire from local councils or contributing to the fund. The extent of Glasgow City Council’s investment in this lucrative but deadly trade sparked outrage. The global arms trade devastates lives, tramples on human rights, and jeopardizes security across the world. Anti-arms campaigners say the export and sale of arms entrenches a militaristic rather than diplomatic approach to international concerns.

Andrew Smith of British charity Campaign Against the Arms Trade (CAAT) decried Glasgow City Council’s investment choices. “Glasgow City Council is meant to be committed to public welfare and the public good, and should not be investing in companies that directly profit from war and conflict around the world,” he told the Scottish Herald. “The arms trade is a deadly and illegitimate industry and people across Glasgow will be shocked to find that the council is using their money to boost companies that arm dictators and human rights abusers.”

A spokesman for Glasgow City Council told the Scottish Herald the Strathclyde Pension Fund has its “own committee structure and governance which is responsible for investment strategy.” He claimed the local authority is not responsible for investment decisions relating to the fund.

Tommy Sheridan - the Shameless Scottish Nationalist

Tommy Sheridan’s Solidarity officially endorsed a vote for the SNP position for the May 7 General Election. A large majority of 65 or so delegates at their conference in Motherwell last Saturday voted in favour. A statement by the Solidarity executive described an SNP vote as “a progressive vote against the red, yellow and blue Tories” who “denied Scotland its independence last September.” Sheridan and Solidarity are openly supporting a pro-business party and a party that Surgeon has made clear will endeavor to put Miliband into 10 Downing St.

Shortly after the referendum vote Sheridan wrote: “in order to maximise the pro-Independence vote in next May’s General Election, all Yes supporters should vote for the SNP...” Speaking at the Solidarity conference, Sheridan insisted, “All my life I have called for a mass party of the working class. The SNP have become a mass party of the working class. They may be led by a middle class leadership, some of whom are certainly not socialists but are free marketeers in their very fibres. But the truth is that that party is almost 100,000 in Scotland and working class people are orientating towards it.”

The Socialist Party Scotland, the Scottish wing of the Socialist Party of England and Wales which grew out of the Militant Tendency faction, confirmed its decision to quit its support for Solidarity in a statement accusing Sheridan of moving away from a "principled socialist position" because they would rather that Sheridan had promoted their own pet project, the Trade Unionist and Socialist Coalition.  A bit like the pot calling the kettle black...

This, of course, vindicates the stand taken by the Socialist Party in opposition to the promotion of Scottish independence by the nationalist-left.

Tommy the Leader - Towards the Precipice