According to Papal doctrine, popes are infallible. The New York Times writes (November 2), "On paper, that doctrine seems to grant extraordinary power to the pope – since he cannot err, the first Vatican Council declared in 1870, when he 'defines doctrine concerning faith or morals to be held by the whole church." John XXIII said, " I am only infallible if I speak infallibly, but I shall never do that." And I thought we were all sinners! John Ayers
The Glasgow & Edinburgh Branches Blog. Towards a better understanding of the world, in order to change it.
Tuesday, December 08, 2015
'Enough is Enough'
People have had their bellyful of capitalism. We all know
what we’re against, more or less, on the other hand, we aren’t too clear about
what we’re for. A major question for socialists is how to challenge and overthrow
the capitalist state to build a just society. Signposts to that society would
be invaluable. There is throughout the world a widespread popular perception
that socialism is a coercive system, and the experiences of ‘communist’ parties
in power have justified that impression. Generally speaking, while the world's
peoples hate capitalism, they fear socialism. These issues are at the heart of
socialism's crisis, and only as socialists develop a movement and a vision
which are at once revolutionary and democratic will they turn the corner of
that crisis. The Socialist Party rejects any notion of class dictatorship that
implies a despotic form of government, that identifies the dictatorship of the
proletariat with an ever-expanding state apparatus or that infers a dictatorship
of any ruling party over the people as a whole.
Ownership divides society into two distinct classes. One is
the class of employers, and the other is the class of wage-workers. The
employers are the capitalist class; and the wage-workers are the working class.
While the working class, by their labour, produce to-day — as in the past — all
the wealth that sustains society, they, nevertheless, lack economic and
industrial security, suffer from overwork, enforced idleness, and their
attendant miseries, all of which are due to the present capitalist form of society.
The capitalist class, through the ownership of most of the land and the tools
of production — which are necessary for the production of food, clothing,
shelter and fuel — hold the workers in complete economic and industrial
subjection, and thus live on the labour of the working class. Working people,
in order to secure food, clothing, shelter and fuel, must sell their labour-power
to the owning capitalists — that is to say, they must work for the capitalist
class. The working class do all the useful work of society, they are the
producers of all the wealth of the world, while the capitalist class are the
exploiters who live on the wealth produced by the working class. As the
capitalists live off the product of the workers, the interest of the working
class is diametrically opposed to the interest of the capitalists. The
capitalist class — owning as they do, most of the land and the tools of
production — employ the working class, buy their labour-power, and return to
them in the form of wages, only part of the wealth they have produced. The rest
of the wealth produced by the workers the capitalists keep; it constitutes
their profit — i.e., rent, interest, and dividends. Thus the working class
produce their own wages as well as the profits of the capitalists. In other
words, the working class work a part only of each day to produce their wages,
and the rest of the day to produce surplus (profits) for the owning class. The
interest of the employing class is to get all the surplus (profits) possible
out of the labour of the employees. The interest of the worker is to get the
full product of their labour.
Hence there is a struggle between these two classes - the
“class war” It is a struggle between the owning capitalist class — which must
continue to exploit the working class in order to live — and the non-owning
working class, who, in order to live must work for the owners of the land and the
tools of production. To win economicfFreedom the non-owning Working Class must
force this struggle into the political field and use their political power (the
ballot) to abolish capitalist class ownership, and thus revolutionise in the
interests of the working class the entire structure of society. The capitalist
class, who own most of the land and the tools of production, own the government
and govern the working people, not for the well-being of the people but for the
well-being and profit of the ruling class.
It is only by using their political power that the
Capitalist Class make their exploitation of the Working Class legal and the
oppression of their system constitutional. And it is only by using their
political power that the Working Class can make their own exploitation illegal
and their own oppression unconstitutional. It is only by the use of their
political power that the Working Class can abolish Capitalist Class rule and privilege,
and establish a planned form of Society based on the Collective Ownership of
all the land and the tools of production, in which equal industrial right shall
be the share of all. We, members of the working class, organised in the
Socialist Party declare that to the workers belong the future. We, the workers
of the world can, through the ballot box and the power of the vote, abolish the
capitalist system of ownership with its accompanying class rule and oppression,
and establish in its place socialism — an industrial democracy — wherein all
the land and the tools of production shall be the common property of the whole
people, to be operated by the whole people for the production of commodities
for use and not for profit. We ask other members of the working class to
organise with us to end the domination of private ownership — with its
poverty-breeding system of unplanned production — and substitute in its place
the socialist co-operative commonwealth in which every worker shall have the
free exercise and full benefit of his or her faculties, multiplied by all the
modern factors of technology and civilisation.
The Socialist Party holds aloft its ideas. It is above all
compromise, a party of truth. We alone cannot now transform society. What we
can do is help transform the people who will remake society. Our task as
socialists is to make more socialists. There are differences among those who
consider themselves to be socialists the world over, not only on principles,
but on action as well. We have to make our choice. But we should not try to
talk away differences that will continue to exist. For years to come the
Socialist Party’s primary work must be
the making of socialists, and, isolated as we are, to some extent we must carry
on that work in our own way. We will organise because we are face to face with
conditions that require united action of our class at the ballot box which
requires a political education acquired only by careful reading and close
investigation where we, the working class, can learn the cause of our
industrial and economic enslavement and how to free ourselves.
What cuts look like - The Forth Road Bridge Closure
 |
| THE CRACKS IN CAPITALISM |
This is a classic example of what happens as budgets fall:
February 2009: It is recognised that work on the truss is
needed, but this is (correctly) deferred until the main cable dehumidification
is complete:
The assessment work has now been completed and an
independent check is being commissioned. Strengthening work on the truss has
also been put back until there is confirmation on the outcome of the
de-humidification scheme. However, work on the truss end links is scheduled to
start in 2010/11 following completion of the independent check
May 2010: A tender for work on the truss end links is
cancelled.
October 2012: Audit Scotland say of Forth Road Bridge
funding from the SNP Government: “The budget for capital expenditure was cut
significantly and a report highlighting the impact on the Capital Plan was
noted by Board Members.”
August 2013: Work
on the truss is planned on the truss ends:
As reported in June 2013, the Chief Engineer and
Bridgemaster will bring three projects to tender during 2013/14. The projects
that have been selected on the basis of criticality and affordability are; Main
Cable Acoustic Monitoring, Truss End Linkages and Suspended Span Gantry
Improvements. It is currently estimated that these three projects will cost
£2.270m based on the current Capital Plan. This will represent the majority of
the funds available for non-committed schemes and therefore it is recommended
that a full risk assessment of all projects on site is carried out before the
tenders are approved.
February 2014:
Planned work “deferred” due to Scottish Government budget cuts: During this
second round of deferrals, the four projects detailed below were identified as
having the highest estimated cost.
Therefore, these projects had to be considered in part or full for deferral
in order to produce a significant reduction in the predicted deficit...
May 2015: Work is further delayed: The intention of the
Authority was to carry out a trial repair on one tower leg and if successful,
this repair would be carried out on the other three tower legs. However, due to
issues with the quality of the existing tower steelwork; the difficulties of
access and the existence of red lead paint, coupled with the loss of key
management staff, the focus changed during the year to completing the trial on
one tower leg before the end of May 2015.
If the trial is successful, a recommendation would be made to Transport
Scotland that this work be continued post abolition of the Authority. If the
repair trial is unsuccessful then full replacement will have to be considered
by Transport Scotland.
Maintenance and repair are often the first budgets to go,
quick savings with little immediate adverse impact, and, with any luck, the
person who authorises the cuts will have moved on before they start to
bite. Hence why roads get pitted with
potholes, and hospitals get paint peeling from the walls. There's always a higher priority budget, and
yet, maintenance is actually the most important budget, because, when things
break, often the costs of repair or replacement are astronomical.
This illustrates a problem for public finances: governments
borrow to build, and often repay over 60 years, which is longer than the
lifespans of the buildings, so alongside the costs of paying for the building
in the first place, they have to pay for it a second time in maintenance.
YMS
Monday, December 07, 2015
The future is ours if we want it
The situation facing workers is as grave as at any time in
human history. Globally, the situation is dire. The world faces a catastrophic climate
change crisis with potentially disastrous consequences for us all. Capitalism is
responsible for taking the planet and its peoples towards the edge of the
abyss. The whole history and experience of capitalism demonstrates that it is a
system of crises and contradictions.
There is a mounting urgency to lift people out of hunger,
poverty and disease. Our planet’s eco-system must be rescued before it
deteriorates beyond the point of no return. Even under wasteful and destructive
capitalism, the productive forces exist that could, if planned and utilised to
meet human need instead of maximising capitalist profit, ensure sufficient
food, nutrition, health care and education for all. Indeed, never before in
history have the rapid advances in science and technology provided such
opportunities for the all-round development of every human being. For as long
as capitalist ownership of the economy exists, whether or not the so-called
‘free market’ dominates or the State monopolises, its operations will produce
crisis, destruction, inequality and waste on an enormous scale. Capitalism’s
drive to maximise profit leads it to turn every area of human need – food,
clothing, shelter, healthcare, education, sex, leisure – into a market for the
production and sale of commodities for profit. However, when sufficient profit
cannot be realised, even the products and services to meet society’s most vital
needs will not be produced.
Only common ownership can put an end to pointless and
wasteful competition and duplication. The development and deployment of
society’s productive forces would be planned in order to meet people’s real
needs and aspirations. Jobs, houses and vital or useful goods and services
would be created as the primary purpose of planning and production, not as the
incidental consequence of maximising profits for shareholders. In particular, common
ownership is the only viable basis on which energy can be planned and developed
in an integrated way, to combat global warming and climate change while
ensuring renewable power supplies. The only sure protection against climate
change is the replacement of a society based on accumulation for profit with
one based on production for need. But that will not come about if we wait for
it.
A socialist society run in the interests of the vast masses
of humanity, and not a tiny elite class of profiteers, is the only alternative.
It is not pie-in-the-sky dreaming or just a “smarter” way of running things; it
is the logical conclusion of capitalism’s development. Capitalism has itself
laid the basis for transcending the misery to which it condemns humanity. It
long ago built up the economic productive forces—industry, technology and a
globalized economy—to the point where the potential exists to produce an
abundance of all need resources. But that potential remains trapped by
capitalism’s pursuit of profit. To redirect society’s productive forces toward
producing in the interests of the majority, control of the State and the
economy will have to be captured from the capitalists. This cannot be achieved
in one country—it will take revolutions across the world.
By planning economic production in the interests of the
masses of humanity, workers would do so much more than just improve their
immediate living conditions. Class society first arose in history as a result
of a scarcity of necessary goods. The struggle to control small surpluses of
food, for example, saw society divide into a tiny elite who enjoyed the profits
of rule over an exploited majority. Scarcity continues to underpin capitalist
class society, driving nationalism and racism as the way capitalist forces
rally support in a fight of all against all for dwindling resources. By
producing an abundance of necessary goods for all, workers would undermine the
very basis for the existence of classes. Necessary work would be divided
equally among all. And the introduction of labour-saving technology, instead of
creating unemployment as it does under capitalism, would be used to shorten the
work-week and free peoples’ lives for greater leisure. In such ways the basis
would be laid to the development of a society free of all forms of exploitation
and oppression. Capitalism has created the class with the potential to
overthrow it: the working class. With no way to survive without working for and
being exploited by the capitalists, the working class has no fundamental
interest in maintaining the system. Drawn from across the world and forced into
cooperation and labor in their jobs, the working class can turn this
organization against the capitalists in collective struggle. Through the
experience of such class struggles, more and more workers can come to
revolutionary socialist conclusions and consciousness.
Sunday, December 06, 2015
Industrial Democracy
Socialism can be defined as a system in which production is
geared toward human need and not for the private profit for the few, where
everybody can have a say in what is produced, how it is produced and how it is
distributed. Decisions will be made in the workplaces and communities as a
whole, developing the capacities of all. Social ownership of the means of
production does not mean the state owns all enterprises and directs social
life. There is no class or other form of elite that stands above society making
the decisions. We are talking about a different world than the one we live in
now. A blueprint for such a future is not possible; a better world will be
created in its making. But we can indicate the direction society will take with
a compass. Tangible examples and concrete ideas are necessary if the vast
majority of humanity are to break free from their acceptance of capitalism as
“common sense” or the “only alternative.” Capitalism’s staying power rests on
the widely held belief that there is no other option to it.
People’s need to sell their labor power — that is, their
need to obtain employment in order to survive — and the creation of perpetual
unemployment creates a dependency on capital that has continued for so long
that the capitalist mode of production comes to be seen as “self-evident
natural laws.” Struggles are therefore contained within the confines of
capitalism. Bargaining over wages and working conditions can become
contentious, but this is never more than bargaining over the terms of
exploitation; the relations within this system are never touched. We are told
we are incapable of making decisions and thus unable to develop ourselves. We
are also kept divided along gender, racial, religious and national lines and
fighting among ourselves, helping keep capitalists in power. Who is this
working class? It everybody who has no choice but to “sell their labour power”
— those who cannot survive other than by hiring themselves to a capitalist.
Those who have a job, those out of work and those who survive in the informal
sector.
Thus an alternative common sense must be constructed that can
only be built from the bottom up. The Communist Manifesto said:
“All previous historical movements were movements of
minorities, or in the interest of minorities. The proletarian movement is the
self-conscious, independent movement of the immense majority, in the interest
of the immense majority”
And also in the Manifesto they explain “The first step in
the revolution by the working class, is to raise the proletariat to the
position of ruling class, to win the battle of democracy.”
Marx and Engels later made clear that “the emancipation of
the working class is the task of the workers themselves”
They never taught that nationalisation signified the
establishment of socialism. That’s not stated by Marx and Engels anywhere. All
the great Marxists defined socialism as a classless society—with abundance,
freedom and equality for all; a society in which there would be no state, not
even a democratic workers’ state. Capitalism, under any kind of
government—whether bourgeois democracy or fascism or a military police
state—under any kind of government, is still capitalism and a system of minority rule,
and the principal beneficiaries of capitalist democracy are the small minority
of exploiting capitalists; scarcely less so than the slave-owners of ancient
times.
The Communist Manifesto said: “In place of the old bourgeois society,
with its classes and class antagonisms, we shall have an association.” NB: “an
association”, not a state—“an association in which the free development of each
is the condition for the free development of all”
In the old days, many
socialists used to give a shorthand definition of socialism as “industrial
democracy”: the extension of democracy to industry, the democratic control of
industry by the workers themselves, with private ownership eliminated. That
socialist demand for real democracy was taken for granted an the time when the
socialist movement was still young and uncorrupted.
Saturday, December 05, 2015
For a fair world
Standing in the way of social progress and socialism is the
capitalist class. The capitalists are a powerful enemy and it will require
protracted efforts to overthrow them. But there is a potentially much more
powerful force opposing them: the vast majority of people, billions of people
all over the world. We are many, they are few, as Shelley put it.
Capitalists live off the exploited labour of others. Marx
pointed out that in the case of slavery the slaves were oppressed and exploited
in order to produce use values for the slave-owners. This is distinct and
different from the exploitation of the working class by the capitalist class,
whose goal, as Marx puts it, is “the production of surplus value as the
absolute law.” Under socialism, although the value of products, based on
socially necessary labour time, must be taken into account, still commodity
production is made subordinate to the goal of producing use values for the
working people, such as food, clothing, housing, health care, transportation.
Exploitation under capitalism is achieved through the buying of labour power,
based on the exclusion of the workers from the ownership of the means of
production. Under socialism workers are not re-united with the means of
production in the sense of individually owning them. Private ownership can be
supplanted by state ownership without changing the basic social relationship.
The working class is the class that is most systematically
and brutally exploited by capitalism, and is the most revolutionary class. The
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 many 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 will be the class of the socialist revolution. Through struggle
and education, workers will realise that their interest lies in the overthrow
of capitalist private property profit system and the establishment of common ownership.
But such a revolution will require the solid unity of the workers of all
nationalities. The working class is multinational, composed of workers of many
different nations. Their common identity is that they are all exploited by the
capitalist class.
Most people wonder what the future holds for them, their
family and their friends. They want to know if it is possible to see a future
free from the stresses and worries of today, free from the poverty for millions
and the homelessness. People ask, must the rat-race continue? They want to know
why a small number of rich people should cream off most of the benefits of
modern technology while the rest of us spend our days in endless drudgery. We
have been told such problems are the fault of “human nature” and “man’s in-born
greed”, and the like? Socialists believe it is the way our society is ordered
today and that there are already other forces growing that can change it for a
better one, where life can be improved and made better for all. Our confidence
comes also from the study of what life was like in the past, how it has changed
and what made it change. It is not “human nature” that is the cause of the
problems people face today. It is how society is organised, with a minority of
people owning and controlling the wealth and the industry, excluding the vast
majority of the people from any real say in the running of society. It is this
system, which we call capitalism, which cannot guarantee security of
employment, cannot provide the good things of life for all, cannot give a
constantly improving standard of living for the millions and cannot guarantee
peace in the world. It is this that must be changed. The working people who
have produced all the wealth around us must come into common ownership and democratic
control of what is their own by right, so that they can then build the society
and produce the things they want. The vast majority of the people gain nothing
from capitalism and would lose nothing with its passing.
Friday, December 04, 2015
Solving Problems
It is necessary, at various stages, to re-examine and analyse the principles, policies and tactics of the World Socialist Movement to consolidate and refresh the ideas. The movement of the working class does not proceed in a straight line. The working class does not come to revolutionary conclusions easily. There is the problem of tactics as tactics, and not as for-all-time strategies. The most vital need for all socialists is a proper sense of history and an appropriate sense of proportion - without these we are lost. Our current strength and resources are extremely small. That has always been our curse. Nevertheless we have not succumbed to the reformist pressure constantly upon us.
As socialists, we supported no capitalist party. Voting for the Conservatives or the Labour Party means supporting both parties’ attacks against the working class and especially the most vulnerable. Capitalism is a decadent system that offers no future for workers. We are ruled by a minority against the interests of the majority.
“That this emancipation must be the work of the working class itself.” says our Declaration of Principles. No small groups of conspirators could bring about the changes we believe are necessary to change the world. This will take the power of the great majority of the people organised determined to introduce socialism. Of course there are some who believe that the people of our country are an unintelligent mass who can’t think for themselves, who will never move against the injustices that beset them daily, and that the fate of the people rests in the hands of a small number of the most intelligent or most courageous and active who will take action themselves without waiting for the “common herd”. According to such people it is inspired leaders who make history and not ordinary men and women. We, in the Socialist Party, oppose to such ideas. We recognise, of course, that some individuals have played a big part in making the history of the world, and there have been influential men and women in the socialist movement, but their ideas have only been effective when the people have been convinced that these ideas are correct, are beneficial for them. So all our efforts are directed towards getting the great majority of the people to right their own wrongs, to take action themselves in their own interests and we have confidence in the ability of the people to do this. We have always argued against those who have a contempt for the people and who take “short cuts” by acts of individual violence or terror which we know from bitter experience do not advance the peoples’ interests but hold them back.
The great majority are ruled by a small minority who, because they own and control the industries, mines, ships, banks, etc., also control the livelihood of the workers who work for them? This small minority is actually a dictatorship which decides, on the basis of whether it is profitable for them or not, whether a man or woman will work or not and how he or she will work. The worker has no say whatsoever in this vital matter.
The objective of the Socialist Party is a classless society where the people as a whole own the means of production (factories, mines, etc.) and where production is for people’s use, not for private profit. The principle of society is “from each according to ability, to each according to needs”. Production will be of such a high level that there are abundant commodities for every member of the community and each member helps oneself according to need.
Thursday, December 03, 2015
No change at the top
The top echelons of Scottish society are dominated by an
elite group of people who attended private schools and the best universities,
according to a new study which warns that people from poorer backgrounds are
being prevented from reaching the top of their chosen professions by a “class
ceiling”. Many of the top professions in Scotland are dominated by privileged
people in much the same way as the rest of the UK, busting the “myth” that the
country is inherently fairer and does not have a problem with social mobility,
the Elitist Scotland? report concludes.
“The lack of people from ordinary social backgrounds at the
top of Scottish society indicates that a lot of talent is going to waste.
Perhaps most importantly it is unfair that those with the talent from less
advantaged backgrounds too often find a ‘class ceiling’ that prevents them from
reaching the top of their chosen fields,” it adds.
Studying the backgrounds of almost 850 leaders in politics,
business, the media and other areas of public life in Scotland, researchers at
the Social Mobility and Child Poverty Commission found that 45 per cent of
senior judges were privately educated compared to less than 6 per cent of the
country’s overall population.
Socialism is Freedom
We know that most workers today do not consider themselves
revolutionaries but isn’t it time to give a revolutionary party an opportunity
to be heard? While today only a few workers are revolutionaries, over time
through workers seeing their own power in action, more and more workers will
see that we could run society ourselves and do away with capitalism. The socialist
alternative that we advocate today will become more widespread. More and more
workers will join to build a true party of the working class. But we freely
confess that presently the weakest point of our organisation is the serious
lack of roots in the working class movement.
Throughout the world workers are threatened by the
capitalists. When workers protest against lousy pay and lousy working conditions,
the bosses remind us that there are millions of workers without jobs who would
gladly take our positions. Workers are pitted against each other for a
shrinking number of jobs. Only the bosses can benefit from that. By uniting
against its real enemy, the ruling class, we can fight against the growing
racism and anti-immigrant agenda which is dividing workers in today’s
capitalist society. Gradual transition to socialism, to gradually implement
socialism through parliamentary reforms are doomed to fail. Socialists offer a
critique of the limited nature and palliative character of reforms
Critiques of capitalism on the Left have increasingly tended
in recent times to be piecemeal, and specifically related to immediate
‘problems’, shortcomings and failings over a multitude of issues. In other
words, criticism on the Left tends to be directed at one aspect or another of
the workings of a social order dominated by capitalism, without this criticism
being related to the nature of the system as a whole. A socialist critique, on
the other hand, is distinguished by the connections which it always seeks to
make between specific ills and the nature of capitalism, as a system wholly
geared to the pursuit of profit, whose dynamic and ethos suffuse the whole
social order, and which necessarily relegates all considerations other than the
maximization of profit to a subsidiary place, at best, in the scheme of things.
There are many people on the Left who accept all this, and more, but who go on
to argue that the failures, shortcomings and derelictions of capitalism require
by way of remedy greater state intervention, regulation, direction and
prohibition, rather than common ownership, which is declared to be irrelevant.
It is an attractive argument, since it appears to dispose so easily of all the
great complications and problems which are certain to attend the implementation
of common ownership and the argument is all the more attractive since it has
been possible to achieve a good deal of regulation of capitalist enterprise.
The trouble, however, is that this intervention has not normally impaired very
materially the power of capitalists to make decisions of major local, regional,
national and international importance without much or any reference to anybody.
A more radical measure of interventionism is possible in crisis circumstances,
but is difficult to maintain effectively, at least in capitalist-democratic
conditions, against the opposition, ill-will, circumvention and sabotage which
it is bound to encounter on the part of business. Nor obviously does
interventionism change the essential character and dynamic of capitalism. In
short, intervention and regulation, are no substitute for democratic common ownership,
if the purpose is the radical transformation of the capitalist system.
Socialists share the understanding that all social
institutions and historical processes are in the last analysis determined and
structured by social relationships which in turn are determined by the
relations of production which are dominant in the society. Thus all social
institutions and historical processes must be ultimately explained by their
contribution to the mode of production or, to contradictions in the mode of
production, or among different modes of productions. Also agreed by socialists
is that since the decline of primitive communism and until the overthrow of the
last class society the historical process and social institutions are permeated
with the struggle between different classes (as defined by their relation to
the means of production). Classes are the primary historical and institutional
actors and thus an analysis of all major social struggles and processes must be
a class analysis of which class is acting on what other classes. The labour
Theory of Value/The Theory of Surplus Value developed by Marx explains that virtually
all wealth in a class society is produced by the productive class which does
not own the means of production, but which must produce for the owning class as
a condition for its eating. The owning class always requires that the producing
class produce more than is returned to it as the condition of its labor. Thus
the wealth owned by the owning class is a result of the exploitation of the
surplus value from the producing class. The state in all class societies tends
to be a dictatorship of the owning class and operates in the interest of the
owning class against the interests of the producing class.
It is necessary to patiently educate our fellow workers as
to the necessity of taking power into their own hands. The revolutionary
transformation of society need not be bloody violent revolution and to maintain
this is both historically faulty and dangerous – since it might provoke
adventurism, scare workers away and needlessly call down repression. If more
workers are to be won to the cause of socialism it is clear that we must
greatly advance in our ability to explain the advantages of a socialist world and
how we can achieve it. Today, with the economy still suffering from the
protracted slowdown, rising unemployment as well as an obvious crisis of
ideological and social values, working people are increasingly dissatisfied
with the status quo. However, this discontent does not necessarily translate
into support for the revolutionary socialist option. While there are many
reasons for this, one of the most important is that at the present time the
socialist alternative does not appear so attractive to many. First of all, the
word “socialism” was in the popular consciousness closely associated with the
USSR and Eastern Europe. While these regimes are not socialist we still never
stop hearing that these countries typify what socialism means. Not only did the
old Soviet Union and its satellites repeat this endlessly to cover up the fierce
exploitation of workers in their societies, but the Western media also take up
the same refrain, point their fingers at Russian despotism and saying, “Look,
that is socialism.”
It is clear we must improve our explanation of socialism. We
must repudiate the stereotypes and distortions of what socialism is and show
working people the very real achievements of our class. We must make a start
because the study, debate and discussion of these issues are essential if the
socialist movement is to win more workers. Working people remain open to
socialism and are looking for change. But they remain to be convinced that
socialism can provide them with a better life – greater democracy and improved
material well-being. To respond to their hesitations and answer their objections
socialists must debate the definition of the type of society we would like to
see established. We must be sure to stress that the blueprint of this new
society does not exist in some text, nor can they be mechanically imposed from
above. It will be forged by the working people as we advance in our struggle.
Wednesday, December 02, 2015
A world fit for live in
All rulers in this barbaric capitalist world are prepared to
see people die if it is necessary to achieve their goals of accumulating
wealth. They’ll happily blast apart cities and contently preside over a system
that sees hundreds of thousands die each day from poverty.
For many months now, debates have been going on within a
number the left-wing upon how to win over workers to ‘socialism’. Various
organisations have been born such as TUSC and Left Unity and in Scotland RISE.
Now, many are returning to the Labour Party fold since the election of Jeremy
Corbyn. Despite the economic crisis and the devastating effects on workers it
has been mostly the right-wing and the nationalist forces are on the rise. The
Left has failed to provide a channel for discontent to express itself through;
still less has it sought to mobilise discontent to resist the government. As yet
the “socialist” alternative remains very much a fringe phenomenon within the
workers. But the discontent is there and it is growing. The debate is about the
road the working people must follow to free themselves of capitalist slavery
and promote the liberation of other peoples in the rest of the world. That is
why we are getting involved in this battle of ideas and risk the allegations of
sectarianism, dogmatism and purism. We have always been critical, and rightly
critical, of self-proclaimed ‘leaders’, of chest-beating ‘revolutionary’
rhetoric. We are not, and will not be in the immediate future be an effective
alternative to the Labour Party and the reformers. We speak of the socialist alternative
in propaganda terms only. We must always maintain a sober and realistic
appreciation of our true strength and weaknesses. But it is even more important
to understand the need for initiatives in appropriate circumstances. Without
exaggerating our own strength and influence, we have to understand this and act
accordingly. Our question to fellow workers is “What is the next step?”
An early socialist slogan was ‘Educate, Agitate, Organise’.
It is also a valid slogan for today and beyond. How capitalism works today
strengthens the case for socialism. We need a different form of society, one in
which working people get together to decide collectively and democratically how
the world’s resources should best be used. Productive resources shouldn’t be
controlled by cliques of overpaid CEOs and their political cronies, but by the
people who actually do the work of producing the goods and services on which we
all depend. Rather than an economic system that relies on capitalists betting
on which way the market will go, we need one based on democratic planning whose
aim is to match resources to the real needs of ordinary people. The case for
socialism is even stronger today than it was in the past. This conception of
socialism has to be reflected in how we organise, a party based on the idea of
a socialism which workers make for themselves.
Tuesday, December 01, 2015
The power of the people is stronger than the people in power
 |
| THE SOCIALIST PARTY, THE GENUINE REAL THING |
Reformism is a proven failure. Reformism by its nature means
class collaboration. At the dawn of the 20th century, social democracy re-modelled
itself within the workers’ movement and began preaching the utopian lie that
capitalism could be reformed and made humane through concessions and
compromises with the ruling class. It cannot be denied that reformists derailed
workers’ struggles. Reformism is not a moderate or gradual form of socialism,
but its foe. Socialists never support candidates of capitalist parties because there
is nothing more dangerous for the workers than endorsing a class enemy. We want
the working class to become conscious of itself and its power in society.
Genuine revolutionaries understand that all political consciousness begins with
recognition of the fundamental class division: the working class versus the
ruling capitalist class. Success in the class struggle demands working-class
independence from all capitalist parties and platforms. Some political
activists promote reformists leaders today and think they will outsmart them
tomorrow by recruiting their supporters. This will supposedly help the
socialist and working-class struggle. But all they are doing is giving a radical
cover to capitalist reformism and diverting activists from the necessary tasks.
For any organization claiming to be socialist to endorse reformism is a
shameful betrayal of the principles they allegedly stand for. The Socialist
Party uses electoral campaigns to advance socialist consciousness among
workers. The only real solution for the working class is the socialist
revolution and the overthrow of the capitalist state.
The present capitalist system is based on a central
contradiction. On the one hand it depends on networks that merge the labour of
most of the world’s seven billion people into what is in effect a global system
of cooperation. Just look at the clothes you wear. They are made from materials
from one part of the world, carried by ships made from steel from somewhere
else, woven in a third place, stitched in a fourth, transported using oil from
a fifth, and so on. A thousand individual acts of labour are combined in even
the simplest item. On the other hand, the organisation of these networks is not
based on cooperation, but on ruthless competition between rival highly
privileged minorities who monopolise the means that are necessary for
production – the tools, the machines, the oil fields, the modern communications
systems and the land.
What motivates the capitalists is not the satisfaction of
human need. It is the pressure to compete and keep ahead of other capitalists.
The key to keeping ahead in competition is making profit and then using the
profit to invest in new means of keeping ahead. Sometimes these investments do
indeed produce things of use to the mass of people. But they are just as likely
to be directed towards building a new supermarket next door to an existing one
owned by a rival, spending money on rebranding old drugs rather than
researching new ones, establishing a monopoly of cumbersome software to keep
out better rival systems, invading countries to seize control of their oil or
hoarding food that is short supply to force its price up. Such a system
necessarily leads to repeated crises, since the drive for profit leads rival
capitalists to rush to pour money into any venture that seems profitable, even
though the result of them all doing so is to force up prices of raw materials
and to produce goods that the world’s workers cannot afford to buy because
their wages have been held down to boost profits.
The socialist alternative to such a state of affairs is
simple. It is to replace decision making on the basis of competition between
rival groups of capitalists by a genuine democracy where people democratically
decide what the economic priorities should be and work together to plan how to
achieve these. It is said that such planning cannot work because modern
productive systems are too complex. Yet every major capitalist enterprise
undertakes planning to fulfil its objectives.
Tesco does not rely on the local street market to restock
its shelves. It plans months, even years in advance to guarantee the supplies of the
thousands of products available in every big store. In the same way Nissan try
to plan in detail the production of the thousands of components that go into
any one of their car models – even if the planning involves imposing their
demands on smaller firms that supply them. Those who do the planning, it should
be added, are very rarely the owners of the giant corporations – rather
they employ technical staff to do the job for them. In the same way it is
employees, not owners or directors, who carry out scientific research, develop
new production techniques and make all of the advances to which the capitalist
system then lays claim. If planning and innovation are possible under the
present system, they are just as possible under a system based upon meeting
human need through democratic decision making, rather than competing in order
to make profits to direct towards further competition. Indeed, under such a
system, planning would be easier. The planning that takes place in any
capitalist corporation at the moment is always distorted by the impact of the
planning taking place in rival corporations. Nissan can spend billions on a new
car only to find the market is already flooded with products from Volkswagen or
Toyota. Tesco can lay out grandiose plans for the next half dozen years only to
find that the crisis caused by blind competition in financial markets is
cutting people’s ability to buy what it has to sell.
To reshape society it is necessary to take control of those planning
decisions, subordinating them to the fulfillment of democratically decided
priorities. A socialist society would involve the mass of people in democratic
debate to plan production to meet human need. What stands in the way of such an
approach is not its lack of viability but the vested interests who own and
control the production of wealth today that will do anything in their power to
keep things that way. The capitalist class will try to cling on to their own
economic power to the end.
The international character of the capitalist process means
that the only way to make a final escape from its grip is by developing
struggles that spread from country to country. Only then can the new
democratically controlled productive networks have at their disposal all the
resources needed to provide a better life for the bulk of humanity.
Monday, November 30, 2015
Live Long and Prosper
Capitalism must be abolished. Working people need to throw
the capitalist parties out of office and fundamentally transform society. The
entire apparatus of government, set up to defend the interests of the
capitalist class, must be replaced. The needs of working people can only be met
by creating an economy, where ownership and control of means of production and
distribution are taken from the tiny minority of capitalists and placed in the
hands of the working people, to be run democratically. Reorganised on a
socialist basis, our world can be free of racism, sexism, poverty, economic
insecurity and exploitation. When the vast resources available to us are used
to serve the needs of all instead of the profits of the few, a world socialist
commonwealth, then the way will be opened for unparalleled growth in culture,
freedom and the development of every individual. Such a society is worth organizing
for. Socialists often hear the comment that "Socialism is a good idea but
it’s not practical." But today it’s becoming more apparent than ever that
it is the present system — capitalism — that is impractical and unworkable. The
quality of life is deteriorating. While people suffer from poisoned air,
polluting companies continue to rake in millions in profits. Small reforms and half-measures
will not change the condition of working people.
The Socialist Party wants to change society but we think
that problems will not disappear by wishing or hoping them away. The only way
we can get a rational society, based on the needs of the majority, is by
organising for it. The Socialist Party are part of the international World
Socialist Movement, fighting to replace this society with a socialist one,
where production and resources are controlled by the majority to serve our
human needs and where every individual will have the opportunity to develop his
or her potential to the fullest extent. Workers in all countries need to stand
together against the worldwide system of oppression and exploitation that is
capitalism. Socialism in Britain can only develop in a socialist world as part
of a global re-structuring of the planet and its resources.
We know that a better world is not only possible, but
absolutely necessary. We take every opportunity to present our case for change to
convince people of the need to do away with the repressive, unjust capitalist
system, and replace it with socialism. The capitalist system is run for the
profits of the few, not the needs of the majority. Workers are thus continually
forced to fight to defend their interests. Through these struggles, they will
come to increasingly see the need for socialism, to replace capitalism. The
Socialist Party actively advocate and promote our aims 365 days a year. We are,
in principle, in favour of fusing electoral activity with extra-parliamentary
action and what takes prominence will be a tactical question. Those on the Left
have no answer except “Vote Labour ... without illusions”. And that is no
answer at all.
Who owns the North Pole Part 88
The global race for the Arctic’s riches is already in
progress and attracting military interests, according to US State Secretary
John Kerry, who says Washington is keeping a close eye on China and Russia and
adapting its “national security” strategy.
Our future national security strategy is going to be
affected also by what’s going on in the Arctic. The melting of the polar cap is
opening sea lanes that never before existed,” Kerry said in a speech at OldDominion University. “The potential there is already there for a global race to
exploit the resources of the region.” Kerry went on to say “Economic riches
tend to attract military interest as nations seek to ensure their own rights
are protected. And we know, because we track it, that these countries – like
Russia, China, and others – are active in the Arctic.”
The restoration of Russian military infrastructure in the
Arctic began in 2012 with the aim of being completed by 2020. Russia is
developing mobile nuclear power plants designated for military installations in
the region. It is also adopting military technology to better suit the harsh
weather conditions in the polar region. Moscow has almost finished building a
new Arctic military base on Kotelny Island, off the eastern Siberian coast.
Russian troops will be deployed there, and at a series of smaller Arctic bases
and airfields by 2018, equipped with all the necessary high-tech weaponry.
China has been an observer of the Arctic Council since May
2013, and has no claims to the Arctic, but being a manufacturing powerhouse,
Beijing is eager to exploit the Northeastern Passage have access to shorter
shipping routes.
Sunday, November 29, 2015
Celtic's Woes
Celtic was founded to help the poor Irish peasantry who fled their homeland in the 19th century following the ravages of an Gorta Mór, the Great Famine, which ravaged the land. The descendants of these people still form the core of the Celtic support and many are also to be found working for the club on low wages or in a part-time capacity. Their love of Celtic and what they think the club represents play a major role in their job satisfaction and loyalty to their employers. For many of the supporters, poverty, multi-deprivation and health inequality remain significant factors in their day-to-day existence.
10,000 recently signed a petition seeking the removal of Ian
Livingston from Celtic’s board of directors. He is a lord of the realm who sits
in the Upper House as a representative of the Conservative party, Lord
Livingston of Parkhead. Earlier this month, he voted in that chamber to support
the government’s plans to end family tax credits, a measure that would have
increased the economic hardship being experienced by tens of thousands of
families who support Celtic. Parkhead is one of the five poorest neighbourhoods
in the United Kingdom, where male life expectancy is barely 60 years and where
the rates of heart disease, unemployment, poor academic achievement and fuel
poverty are scandalously high. Celtic, as a club, has grown successful and its
players very rich on generations of support from Parkhead and many other
districts like it. The petition to remove him was really a cri de coeur from
their core support at what they regard as the continuing betrayal of the club’s
founding principles.
Celtic chairman, Ian Bankier, is the man who defended
Celtic’s refusal to pay the living wage to its lowest-paid employees at the
2013 AGM. As well as that, he asserted inexplicably that Celtic did not
recognise any trade unions and that to pay the living wage to all of its
employees would cost the club around £500k a year. £500k wouldn’t cover the
bonuses of several of the current first team. Since then, Celtic has modified
its position by stating that it will pay the living wage to its full-time staff
but already one of its employees is distressed that in exchange for paying him
the living wage the club is asking him and others to forfeit their annual
bonus.
Celtic is concerned that by signing up to the living wage
set by the Living Wage Foundation it is ceding some control of its remuneration
policy to an outside agency. What it fails to recognise is that there would be
no requirement for the Living Wage Foundation to exist if rich organisations
such as Celtic FC paid all of its employees a wage that gave them an
opportunity to raise a family, feed and heat them and maintain a roof over all
of their heads. By adhering to the socially irresponsible philosophy of the
Conservative party in its wage policy it risks inflicting irreparable damage to
this jealously guarded reputation.
The Socialist Movement
“Study because we will
need all your intelligence.
Agitate because we
will need all your enthusiasm.
Organise because we
will need all your strength.”
Gramsci
Despite the absolute need for a party of socialism we are a
long way off from such a party. By this, we mean a party that has
thousands of members and ultimately, we need to be thinking in terms of a party
of millions of members. But to be a real socialist these days is to be a
political anachronism, a fossilised relic. The central tenet of socialism is
the assertion that the working class is the sole historical agency for the
achievement of socialism. For Marxists the possibility of revolution rests upon
the conscious and free acceptance of socialism by the working class. Gramsci’s
conception of the need for the working class to develop a hegemony
consciousness presupposes the existence of a mass-based socialist movement. In
the absence of such a movement socialist theory is placed in a vacuum.
All those within the working class movement must awaken to
the need to fight our class enemy. We
aim to replace the present capitalist system, with its inherent injustice and
inhumanity, by a social order from which the domination and exploitation of one
class by another will be ended. Our goal is world socialism, a new social system
based on common ownership of our resources and industry, cooperation,
production for use and genuine democracy. Only socialism can turn the boundless
potential of people and resources to the creation of a world free from tyranny,
greed, poverty and exploitation. Capitalism has failed, and so have efforts to
reform it. That failure puts a campaign for the socialist alternative on the
immediate agenda. The needs of people, not profit, are the driving force of a
socialist society. We believe in the ability of people to manage their own
productive institutions democratically. Producing for ourselves, the needs of
the people, living standards would leap forward rather than being cut for the
interests of a tiny minority and their “special interests”. Under capitalism,
labour is a commodity. Workers are used as replaceable parts, extensions of
machines—as long as they provide dividends. Employers use their power of
ownership to devastate the lives of workers through redundancies, out-sourcing and
neglect of health and safety. Trade unions, despite their courageous efforts,
have encountered difficulties eliminating even the worst abuses of management
power.
No matter how long and how hard the struggle, we shall win. The
Socialist Party is the party of the dispossessed and the exploited striving to build a new world and we support all struggles against the injustices of
capitalism. We do not offer a blueprint to a better future. Instead we
invite fellow workers to join us to eradicate a social system based on
exploitation, discrimination, poverty and war. The capitalist system must be replaced
by social democracy. That is the burning issue of our era, the only hope of
humanity. As we have already explained Marxists have a basic starting point to
all of their struggles and ideas – that the working class is a revolutionary
class and as such is capable of overthrowing the capitalist system and
establishing the socialist order. It is a fundamental truth from which we draw
the strength to face the daily struggle. It is an outlook which gives socialists
something unique – an unshakeable confidence in the working class as a
revolutionary force. It is something we have to defend every day against those
who tell us that the working class are so imbued with the ideas of capitalism
that they can always be diverted from the real revolutionary objective. Our
confidence springs not from romanticism but from Marxist theory. That we see
the working class as an exploited class, driven by the realities of class
society into conflict with their exploiters at the point of production. It
means that when all the conditions are present, the overwhelming power of the
working class, as the producers of all wealth, can be harnessed to make a real revolution.
But that as everyone knows is easy to say but very difficult to accomplish in
practice. The Socialist Party wants to build a mass party with its roots in the
working class and its sights set on social revolution. To do this it has to be
a fully democratically structured party, not an authoritarian organisation
controlled and directed by leaders. There is a difference between us and those
vanguard ‘workers’ parties that call themselves ‘socialist’ and we make no
bones about it. We are Marxists. We are revolutionaries. Our strategic goal is people
power. We will not go just a part of the way – or even half of the way – we are
going all of the way and we are going to build a movement and party to do it.
Saturday, November 28, 2015
Something can be done
“We can’t advance and we can’t go home…For us, it’s Europe
or die.” - Bamba, from the Ivory Coast
The Scottish Trades Union Congress (STUC) Annual St Andrews
Day March and Rally takes place Saturday 28th November. The event this year has
the theme ‘No Racism: Refugees Welcome Here’
The UN Refugee Convention recognises that refugees have a
right to enter a country for the purposes of seeking asylum, regardless of how
they arrive or whether they hold valid travel or identity documents. The
Convention stipulates that what would usually be considered as illegal actions
(e.g. entering a country without a visa) should not be treated as illegal if a
person is seeking asylum. This means that it is incorrect to refer to asylum
seekers who arrive without authorisation as “illegal”, as they in fact have a
right to enter to seek asylum. Asylum seekers do not break any laws simply by
arriving without authorisation. International law make these allowances because
it is not always safe or practicable for asylum seekers to obtain travel documents
or travel through authorised channels because refugees are, by definition,
persons fleeing persecution and in most cases are being persecuted by their own
government. It is often too dangerous for refugees to apply for a passport or
exit visa or approach an embassy for a visa, as such actions could put their
lives, and the lives of their families, at risk.
If immigration has led to the rise of the far right groups -
it is only through the racist tactic of blaming economic woes on them. The
majority of informed opinion and study suggest otherwise. If you are unhappy
about this why not condemn the far right groups as opposed to immigration
itself? Building walls around Europe is the most xenophobic, impractical idea
that shows a complete ignorance towards current social and economic factors (as
well as historic). If you want to live in a inward looking walled off country,
please do not include the rest of us in your suggested dystopia. The UK is 53rd
in terms of population density, 2% overall land area taken by development and
160th in terms of birth rate. So we aren't full, and we aren't likely to be
anytime soon. Across Europe the evidence is that migration makes a positive
contribution, not a negative one. Migrants contribute far more than they take
out and they are necessary to keep a balance between retirees and workers.
"Something must be done about Libya ”…”Something must
be done about Syria,”….."Something must be done about Iraq." ...”Something
must be done...something must be done”… and so it goes on and on
We must not blame another worker for our poverty, whether
migrant or not, whether illegal or legal. Those travelling long distances
through fear or desperation are people no different to ourselves. Instead of
falling for the divide and rule tactics which weaken us all, workers should
recognise who their real enemy is and work together to defeat the system that
enslaves us all.
Friday, November 27, 2015
Common Ownership
Why has the working class failed? Why is there little trace
of any revolutionary movement among the workers? Why is it that people all
over the globe seem incapable of initiating anything aimed at their own
self-liberation? To fight you must have a positive aim. The essence of the
future free world community is that workers direct their work themselves,
collectively. The working class has to search for new roads. The real fight for
liberation has yet to begin. A deep inner revolution must take place in the
working classes of clear insight, of solidarity, of perseverance, courage, and fighting
spirit. The goal of the working class is
liberation from exploitation. This goal is not reached and cannot be reached by
a ruling class substituting the capitalists. It can only be realised by the
workers themselves being master over production. The aim of
socialism is to take the means of production and distribution out of the hands of the capitalist
class and place them into the hands of the workers. This aim is sometimes
spoken of as common ownership.
State ownership (nationalisation) is the ownership, i.e. the
right of disposal, by a public body representing society, by government, state
power or some other political body. The persons forming this body, the
ministers, the officials, the managers, are the direct masters of the
production apparatus; they direct and regulate the process of production; they
command and control the workers. Common ownership is the right of disposal by
the workers themselves; the people themselves are direct masters of the
production administrating , managing, directing, and regulating the process of
production which is, indeed, their common work.
Under state ownership the workers are not masters of their
work; they may be better treated and their wages may be higher than under
private ownership; but they are still exploited. Exploitation does not mean
simply that the workers do not receive the full produce of their labor; a
considerable part must always be spent on the production apparatus and for
unproductive though necessary departments of society. Exploitation consists in
that others, forming another class, dispose of the produce and its
distribution; that they decide what part shall be assigned to the workers as
wages, what part they retain for themselves and for other purposes. Under
government ownership this belongs to the regulation of the process of
production, which is the function of the bureaucracy. In other words: the
structure of productive work remains as it is under capitalism; workers
subservient to commanding directors.
Common ownership is the objective of the working class
itself, fighting for self-liberation. Common ownership of the workers implies,
first, that the entirety of producers is master of the means of production and
works them in a well planned system of social production. It implies secondly
that in all shops, factories, enterprises the personnel regulate their own
collective work as part of the whole. So they have to create the organs by
means of which they direct their own work, as personnel, as well as social
production at large. The institute of State and government cannot serve for
this purpose because it is essentially an organ of domination, and concentrates
the general affairs in the hands of a group of rulers. But under socialism the
general affairs consist in social production; so they are the concern of all,
of each personnel, of every worker, to be discussed and decided at every moment
by themselves. Their organs must consist of delegates sent out as the bearers
of their opinion, and will be continually returning and reporting on the
results arrived at in the assemblies of delegates. By means of such delegates
that at any moment can be changed and called back the connection of the working
masses into smaller and larger groups can be established and organization of
production secured.
Such bodies of delegates, for which the name of workers’
councils has come into use, form what may be called the political organisation
appropriate to a working class liberating itself from exploitation. They cannot
be devised beforehand, they must be shaped by the practical activity of the
workers themselves when they are needed. Such delegates are no
parliamentarians, no rulers, no leaders, but mediators, expert messengers,
forming the connection between the separate personnel of the enterprises,
combining their separate opinions into one common resolution. Common ownership
demands common management of the work as well as common productive activity; it
can only be realised if all the workers take part in this self-management of
what is the basis and content of social life.
Thursday, November 26, 2015
Europe's Shame
“We can’t advance and we can’t go home…For us, it’s Europe
or die.” - Bamba, from the Ivory Coast
Austria: Austria is requiring refugees to take an “Austrian values”
course; one of those values is apparently barbed-wire fences, which it erected
to try to keep them from entering the country in the first place.
Belgium: The interior minister has suggested that refugees
wear special identity badges, raising the specter of Europe's fascist past.
Bulgaria: As one of the border countries, Bulgaria has
militarized its territory to try to stop refugees coming from Turkey. Recently,
an Afghan man was shot and killed by border police.
Croatia: Rival political factions have turned the refugees
into a political football, wiht some criticizing the government for letting
them in and others criticizing the refugees' treatment. The country's border
with Serbia has been one of the main entry points for refugees.
Cyprus: The government has made clear it prefers “Christian”
refugees, drawing a religious line in the sand; it also wants to limit refugee
intake to 300.
Czech Republic: Czech police drew gasps worldwide when they
started to write identification numbers on the arms of refugees.
Denmark: Known worldwide as a left-leaning social democratic
state, Denmark refused to show solidarity by declining Sweden's plea to share
some of the refugees it is importing.
Estonia: Estonia's only refugee center can hold about 100
refugees; far-right parties are calling for a referendum to cap the country's
number of refugees, even though the government has only agreed to take in an
additional 550 people.
Finland: “Finnish extremist organizations have been
activated to oppose immigration, and this is the most visible and concrete
security threat,” said Interior Minister Petteri Orpo of the growing backlash
against the refugees.
France: French police have reportedly abused refugees, many
of them living in tents in squalid conditions. French far-right leader Marine
Le Pen declared, with no evidence, that 99 percent of refugees are men.
Germany: Germany has been among the most welcoming
countries, choosing to accept as many as half a million refugees a year. Yet
there have been beatings and even bombings committed against refugees in the
past few weeks as the German far-right reacts to the influx. One German mayor
who welcomed the refugees was stabbed in the neck. At least 580 attacks on
asylum facilities have occurred this year.
Greece: In Greece, hooded men are hunting refugees arriving
by boat. They smash the engines, leaving the refugees stranded.
Hungary: The ruling prime minister has seen his political
fortunes rebound due to his anti-refugee stance; both tear gas and water cannons
were used to repel refugees.
Ireland: The Irish people have rallied to support refugees,
but the country has been fairly modest in the number of refugees it is taking,
slating just 4,000.
Italy: Activists say Italian officials are using refugees'
countries of origin to define them as economic migrants, which would give them
fewer rights and make it easier for Italy to deport them.
Latvia: Latvia agreed to take just 776 refugees, which set
off protests from the far-right. “The refugees are not victims, most of them
are here for money,” said one protester holding a picture of Hungary's
anti-refugee prime minister.
Lithuania: Lithuania's parliament is trying to wrestle
control over where refugees are settled; the country has agreed to bring in
just 1,105 people.
Luxembourg: The small but rich EU country has been critical
of the harsh response of other countries to refugees, but is only letting in a
few dozen itself. One woman who has set up a Facebook page to welcome refugees
has to constantly delete hateful comments.
Netherlands: In the Netherlands, cars belonging to
left-leaning, pro-refugee lawmakers were set on fire, and other politicians
received death threats. A refugee center was burned to the ground, and a
renowned rabbi has called for refugee camps to be set up away from the
country's Jewish neighborhoods because of anti-gay violence within the refugee
centers.
Malta: Malta let in 100 refugees this year; the country is
harshly punishing those who bring refugees into the country outside the quota.
Poland: Only 8 percent of Polish citizens surveyed said
their country should take more than the 20,000 refugees the country is slated
to accept.
Portugal:Portugal has seen protests in response to the small
number of refugees it is taking in, with some citizens holding signs saying
“Protesters NOT Welcome.”
Romania: Romania's president and prime minister have been
quarreling as one made a pact with neighboring countries to close borders to
refugees.
Slovakia: One small town in Slovakia held a vote on
accepting refugees; 97 percent of the residents said no.
Slovenia: Slovenia's president doesn't want his country to
become a “pocket” for refugees, and wants to step up border control to stop
them from coming.
Spain: The mayor of Melilla said he “has to defend Melilla
and its borders and impose order” in response to protests from the left-wing
Podemos party, which is criticizing the country's stance toward refugees.
Sweden: A man donned a sword and attacked a nearby school,
killing a student and teacher assistant and injuring others. Witnesses say he
attacked only dark-skinned people. The attack came as many in Sweden are trying
to stem the flow of refugees.
United Kingdom: UK leader David Cameron infamously referred
to refugees as a “swarm.” The issue becomes contentious as the new leader of
Labour takes a much more pro-refugee stance than his predecessors.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
-
Paternalism is a common attitude among well-meaning social reformers. Stemming from the root pater, or father, paternalism implies a patria...
