The Task Ahead

Welcome to a world of unimaginable wealth and rampant inequality, a world where monolithic corporations act as a law unto themselves, where automation and technological progress threaten to undermine the very foundations of society, and where frightened, forgotten, and furious citizens turn in droves towards political extremism. The Socialist Party doesn’t pretend to have all the answers (although we do to many) and we are distrustful of those who think they do since humility is demanded of us.  In this starkly divided world, the question for ourselves is how to catalyse a united voice of engaged fellow-workers. Our greatest hope for the future rests with new solidarities being forged on the global stage, with the welfare of the collective whole being prioritised above the welfare of any one particular group or nation.  The starting point for the Socialist Party is how to unify our fellow workers on a  common platform for socialism, bringing together millions of people for a shared cause paving the way for social, economic and political transformations.

Stoking fear is a strategy that is emerging as a central agenda of populist politicians. They are employing scare-mongering tactics playing upon people's anxieties. They are cynically manipulating us, using fear as a way to dupe us into supporting their policies. Words have a power and their speeches are creating threats and dangers. Sadly, many fellow-workers are buying into the hate rhetoric. However, the process of creating fear and enemies is a two-way street. We are not mere puppets, with our leaders pulling our strings. We need vision. We need to be defiant. There can be no compromise or concession. Movements cannot win without promising a future that includes beauty, joy, and fun. "Dance the military guns to silence," said the Nigerian activist Ken Saro-Wiwa (executed for his activism against Shell.) It's easy right now to feel like we are facing something unprecedented and unbeatable, but many of the peoples' movements have fought much harsher regimes, but still kept fighting for justice and liberation, anyways, and some of them went on to win incredible victories.

Globalisation enabled global supply chains to spark trade and global economic growth. But the problems of globalization resulted in the loss of jobs, as factories relocated for cheaper labour, growing inequality. All the while, political elites are focused on profits, ignoring the growing anger from the working class. 
The negative impact of globalization exploded into populist nationalism. In the US, the 2008 Great Recession caused more than 2 million jobs lost and several million lost homes in the mortgage crisis while the too big to fail banks were given a life-line and bailed out. Two wars Iraq and Afghanistan costing more than $2 trillion and hundreds of lives shattered the confidence of the American people and sparked resentment against the political elite Demographic change - the diminishing white majority and the increase of non-English speaking immigrants across the US - coinciding with the election of the first black US president elected, the stagnation of wages since the 1980s, and increasing inequality, all led to the populist revolt and the discrediting mainstream politicians.
  Trump made trade and immigrants the villains for job losses. Yet, studies show that nine of ten US jobs lost since 2000 were due to technology and automation, not trade and that since 2014, there has been a net outflow of Mexicans from the US
But populist politics is driven by emotion, not reason. Trade and immigration became punching bags for the anger and frustration that Trump skillfully manipulated.   
In Europe, a number of factors combined to encourage populist nationalism and most dramatically, Brexit. The free flow of labor within the EU led to complaints of "Polish plumbers" in the UK. Growing numbers of Muslim immigrants from North Africa and the Middle East created cultural fear and anger. This has resulted in a growing number of authoritarian regimes, as in Hungary, and the rise of right-wing anti-immigrant politics personified by Brexit, Marine Le Pen in France, as well as similar parties in the Netherlands and in Germany.  
Socialism is the only way we can successfully resist populism. Let’s leave some of the historic baggage surrounding the word “socialism” at the door and start with a clean slate. Socialism does not mean government control. Socialism does not entail a tyrannical one-party state. Socialism means deepening democracy. Under capitalism, we have a political democracy of sorts. We vote for our politicians to “represent” us and make laws. Voting allows us to have a hand in creating the society we want to live in, and if our representatives aren’t doing a good job, we can vote them out.

Calling capitalism “democratic” is only half-true, however. Despite having political democracy, we do not have economic democracy. Think about your boss. Are you able to speak up and change them? Of course not. You’re beholden to your boss, and their word is law. Employees have little to no control over a company’s decisions. In essence, companies are little tyrannies where shareholders have all of the control and the workers are at the mercy of their judgment. If shareholders want to liquidate a company to make a couple million dollars and throw thousands of people out of work, hire a corrupt CEO, or pollute the environment—the workers have no power to say no. This is economic tyranny. Socialism’s solution to economic tyranny is common ownership and democratizing the workplace.

 Money continues to accumulate in the hands of a few and to favour the privileged. There are two worlds — one eating cake, the other, hungry for food. It appears to many that capitalism has only one agenda: to punish the impoverished and to increase inequality while protecting the prosperous and promoting the interest of the powerful. If we are to stop nationalism and populism, it is time for socialism. we must both persuade and mobilise. We have fallen short in both. Starting now, we have to do better.

Folk like us

Scotsman columnist, Jane Bradley, has offered her personal first-hand point of view on the refugee situation and highlighting some of her observations would not go amiss.

“...Those who fled oppression in search of a better life are accused of being cynical economic migrants, but who among us would not have made the same choice...

...No matter what your political beliefs, these refugees are people: people like you and me. We may not be able to help all of them, but we can feel empathy for their plight, we can try to understand why they are in the situation they are in...

...I met many refugees who were undoubtedly fleeing war and persecution. Death threats and imminent danger to their lives. Their cases appeared, to me, cut and dried: they should be granted asylum, somewhere...

...I met others, however, whose stories were more complicated - who may not have had an imminent threat to their lives, but who wanted a better future for their children.

Some of them lived in situations where their daughters would never be allowed to attend school. Others were not in personal danger right now, but lived in a constant fear of political unrest and violence: families who had no idea when or if it would be their door that would be knocked upon by terroist or insurgent groups in the middle of the night. Maybe it would never happen - but it could. So many times, I have heard people like this, sceptically, called “economic migrants”, but I found it was far more complex than that.In reality, few of the people in this situation are likely to be granted asylum in Europe and for me, some of their stories were even more heartbreaking as a result...

...No-one I met wanted to move to Europe to pocket benefits - they wanted to work. They did not want a bigger house or a better car: indeed, many of them knew their living conditions in Europe, even if they made it that far and were granted asylum, were likely to be economically worse than they had been in their home countries of Iraq, or Afghanistan. For most, the priority was being able to give their children the chance of a decent education. “I just want a future for my children,” was a refrain I heard many, many times...

...No-one I met was a cynical “economic migrant”. They were people: ordinary, flawed people, who had found themselves faced with difficult choices and who had done what they thought was right...Why, when faced with such adversity at home, would they not have taken that chance?...we should not condemn them for trying. "

The Not Fair Fares?

Almost every day the Toronto Transit Commission is in the news and it's never anything positive. At present passengers pay a flat-rate fare, which TTC spokesman, Brad Ross, said is "Very user-friendly." 

It won't stay that way if the recommendation in a 2016 report is enacted, which is to pay by the distance travelled. This is being considered by Metrolinx, the provincial organization that oversees transit in the Greater Toronto Area.

At present, the matter is under discussion. Mayor, Tory, said the present price-structure is unfair, which implies that paying by distance is fair.

 This must be of concern to people with low incomes, but of, one thing we can be absolutely sure – if this deal goes through, it will make life harder for the workers affected.

Steve and John.

Better Solution Needed.

It is generally assumed that unemployment and homelessness go hand-in-hand, but it ain't necessarily so. An article in the Toronto Star of February 11, 2017, which focused on homeless shelters, reported that four men, who sleep at the Bloor Street West Shelter, in Toronto, have jobs.

One said, "We just can't afford to rent." With the average one-bedroom apartment rent in Toronto at $1,130.00 a month, it's no wonder. The wait-list for Toronto Community Housing has topped 180,000 and is in massive need of repairs.

Mayor, John Tory, has pressed Ottawa and the province to each kick-in a third of the repair bill of, $2.6 billion, but, "No firm commitments have materialized." Councillor, Kristyn Wong-Tam, said that "Emergency shelters are at best a Band-Aid solution. When that becomes their permanent address, that is a system fail. They have given up hope on affordable housing and are living in shelters."

There are different estimates of how many sleep on Toronto's streets, but it is known, that 80 died on them in 2016. Our well-meaning friend is right, it is a system-fail. The only solution is a better one. 
Steve and John.

Maximum Good or Minimal Good. Yout Choice.

Increases in the cost of transportation and shelter, drove the inflation rate up 1.5% in Canada in December, according to figures released by Statistics Canada on January 20th. A decrease in the cost of food in December (the third consecutive month) helped keep the overall increase in consumer expenses lower than expected. Economists had predicted a 1.7% increase. The Consumer Price Index in Ontario was up 2% from 2015, driven by an 11.2% surge in prices for electricity and a 7.4% increase in the cost of buying a home.

So, there it is folks, slight improvements like the decline in the cost of food do minimal good. We socialists, want to do maximum good, such as abolishing the source of the above figures.

 Steve and John

The Possibility of Post-Capitalism

Capitalism must be removed and replaced with the post-capitalist majority revolutionary alternative. It can't be reformed in any major way, Swedish and Labour Party models do not impinge in any way upon capitalism' rapaciousness. Its is like trying to make a vegetarian out of a tiger.

Lenin's model was a Jacobin one to win power. Lenin wasn't trying to make socialism, but to make state capitalism, not because socialism was impossible or an impossible dream, but because of the fact, as real Marxists told him at the time, socialism is a post-capitalist society and not a post-feudal one, which Russia was becoming.

Capitalist development creates the tools to eradicate poverty and an educated workforce to create and run ever more of it (the capitalist class are a redundant class now inasmuch as they are not needed for wealth production), (which is why Marx supported capitalist revolutions to overthrow feudalism), but then it has to increase or curtail production to satisfy an artificial 'market' demand in the interest of the minority classes profit accumulation.

The minority class has become a fetter upon the realisation of the productive potential of the technological capabilities of the potential productive capacitive process capitalism has bequeathed to the 95% wealth producers.

It can not distribute resources to satisfy human needs without destroying itself in the process and it also doesn't lift us out of the relative poverty, but retains it as a necessity, to ensure a constant supply of waged slaves. as Voltaire wittingly put it, "The comfort of the rich depends upon an abundant supply of the poor."

The comparison is not with early capitalism nor today's version, but between the social and economic position of the immense majority relative to the wealth they collectively produce. The needs of industry demands an educated , fed workforce in many instances, as workers also run capitalism from top to bottom, the diseases of poverty can jump class barriers, so self preservation of the system requires different scenarios to early developmental models but can revert to smokestack circumstances and shanty towns also, as the developing world shows us.

Poverty in those twin senses relative and absolute, is entrenched forever if capitalism is retained, as is war (business by other means), trade wars, war over resources and geopolitical interests.

Don't forget also the horror of two world wars for economic dominance and the war science upon Nagasaki and Hiroshima by the kind hearted capitalist class as they currently pick sides for another go.

To say that 'true socialism is impossible' is akin to a person in feudal times expounding against the coming impossible capitalist revolutions. Nothing will stop social change or an idea which time has come.

The post-capitalist revolution has of necessity to be a majority one. The first time ever for majority revolution and not some vanguardist, Leninist-style minority putsch as all previous revolutions have been minority led, 'meet the new boss' ones.

Using the Achilles heel of bourgeois democracy a politically aware immense majority, conscious of their class interest in abolishing the last great slavery that of wage slavery, can transform the world into a commonly owned, production for use , free access socialist society without elites and change the operating tenet from a minority "Accumulate, accumulate" into a majority one of, "From each according to their ability, to each according to their needs".

It will not happen by gradually reforming capitalism,nor by premature nationalist adventures or mislabelling state capitalist monstrosities, but the primary task of socialists these days is education.


If you open any textbook on economics you will find the definition at the beginning as to what economics is will include the concept of ‘scarcity’. On the one side, it is taught, there are scarce resources and, on the other side, unlimited wants, and that economics is the study of the choices people make (as individuals and societies) to deal with this.

However, the concept of ‘scarcity’ used in these definitions is an abnormal and circular one and human wants are not unlimited. The relationship between scarce resources and unlimited wants is not what economics actually studies. The definition above is an ideological construct to justify one particular way of organising the production and distribution of goods and services – the capitalist system of production for profit, involving markets, money, prices, profits, wages, interest, banks, etc. That’s what economics really studies.

The technological means of the modern age make it possible for everyone in the world to live a comfortable, safe, interesting and happy personal and social life, with all our needs provided, and totally free from hardship, misery and the constant frustration, worry and embarrassment of not being able to afford what we require.
Modern production techniques are entirely capable of providing an abundance of nutritional food for many times the present world population. There is no need for anyone anywhere to starve, to lack nourishment or even to make do with cheap substitutes.

There is enough raw materials, knowledge and manpower in the world to ensure comfortable hygienic accommodation for everyone everywhere. It is possible for everyone to live in houses which are safe, weather-resistant, fitted with up-to-date appliances and decorated and furnished according to individual taste. There is no need for anyone anywhere to be homeless or to live in poor, dangerous and ill-equipped accommodation.



Real socialism is a post-capitalist society where waged slavery will have been abolished. As capitalism is run from top to bottom by the working class, 95%, so it can be replaced by a commonly owned, production for use, free-access,society with no elite access to its products. The capitalist class, liberals or neo-cons, are an economic parasite class. All government, however well meaning politicians are, whether Leftist, Rightist, Centrist,or "Can't make up their minds", to win power, are governments over us in the interests of the dominant economic capitalist parasite class. Capitalism cannot be reformed into some kind of egalitarian system. It cannot be managed in some state-capitalist, soviet-style system, nor can it end the cycles of boom and bust with waged slavery driving the production of wealth. The cause of the Labour Party is not the cause of socialism and never was. It's original reason for existing was to get reforms for working people. Damn all to do with socialism. “The Labour party has never been a socialist party, although there have always been socialists in it – a bit like Christians in the Church of England.” (Tony Benn)
 There is no such thing as a middle class. It is a conceit. Class is a person's relation to the means of producing an ddistribution of wealth. If one HAS ot work for a wage or salary in order to receive a rationed access ot wealth then one is by definition working class. The phrase working class was, as we saw, originally “working classes”, but this usage is loose and theoretically wrong since there is only a single working class. But there is another confusion arising out of the phrase’s association with “working man” and “workman” which refer to manual labour, so that it is often assumed that the working class is confined to manual workers, in the factories and mines', on the railways and docks, etc. This mistake is made not only by those who do not want to be considered as members of the working class, but also by manual workers who do not consider civil servants, clerks and other “pen-pushers” as real workers. But it is a mistake and arises from an alternative and inadequate definition of class in terms of social status rather than relationship to the means of production.

But it is clear that, as far a relationship to the means of production is concerned, office workers (including managers) are in precisely the same position as shop floor workers: they are excluded from ownership and control of the means of production and are forced to obtain a living, by selling their mental and physical energies to an employer. This in fact is our definition of working class: all those who are forced to sell their mental and physical energies in order to live. It would have been convenient to use some phrase such as “wage-earning class” in order to make our point of view clear at first sight, but unfortunately not only does a section of the working class call itself the “middle class" but even denies that it is paid wages as workers are and insists on calling them a salary instead. In fact a salary is equally a price for the sale of a person’s mental and physical energies, but this snobbery means that in order to make ourselves absolutely clear who we mean by working class we have to say “those forced to work for a wage or salary” or, less adequately but more simply, “wage and salary earners”. 



The society of today is a capitalist society and the classes that face one another are the capitalist class and the working class. The form of bondage is different from the forms that prevailed formerly, but it is still bondage.
The wealth producers of today are not bound to a lord or master as were the serfs and slaves. They may refuse their services to this or that capitalist. But they cannot escape from the capitalist class. They must deliver their abilities to some member or members of that class. In no other way do they have access to the things needed to preserve life.
And in spite of the often repeated claim in various circles that the classes of today have mutual and harmonious interests, the facts show a struggle between these classes as grim as any that preceded it. From the beginning of the existing form of society down to the present day there has been a never-ending conflict between the capitalists and the workers: on the part of the capitalists to squeeze every possible ounce of energy from the workers at the lowest possible cost; on the part of the workers to check these efforts and to try in turn to gain bearable living and working conditions for themselves.

Wee Matt

Problems That Can't Be Solved

Canadian officials are now seeing a sharp increase in the amount of refugees illegally crossing the U.S. border to avoid deportation from the U.S. In Quebec alone, the amount has tripled in the last year to 1,280 from 424.

Some who crossed into Manitoba in freezing weather have been treated for frostbite. A pregnant woman said she was afraid to deliver in the U.S. Under the U.S. - Canada pact introduced in 2004, refugees cannot make asylum claims in both countries.

As the weather gets warmer more are expected to cross into Canada.

So too put it bluntly, Canada will soon have a refugee crisis like some European countries have now. 

Once again, capitalism creates problems it can't solve. 

Steve and John.

Treating The Symptons Not The Cause.

Soon it will no longer be a crime in Russia to beat a family member, as long as you don't cause bodily harm.

On January 27, 2017, the state duma, voted 380 - 3 to decriminalize battery on family members that doesn't cause bodily harm. Instead it will mean a fine, or a 15 day sentence. Critics of the new law, said it would encourage domestic violence, (no kidding). Statistics show that 40% of all violent crimes in Russian, are within the family. Russian police are reluctant to react, regarding their intervention as meddling in family matters. 

It would be easy enough for socialists to advocate harsher measures in dealing with those guilty of spousal and child abuse, but that wouldn't be the point; which is the establishment of a society where the economic pressures that cause families to break down (of which this is a symptom) won't exist. 

Steve and John.

A Good Question?

The Canadian capitalist class, is not optimistic about Ontario's economic future. The annual report of the Ontario Chamber of Commerce, released on February 7, 2017, said, "There is a confidence gap between our members organizational and provincial economic outlooks". Only 24% of their members, who were surveyed last fall, expressed optimism; to quote, "Diminished profitability, lower labour market participation and sluggish market activity have resulted in a risk-averse atmosphere in which businesses are disinclined to grow production."

So if the capitalists have little optimism, why should we have any? 

Steve and John.

Overpopulated world, or not?

Many people have come to see the tragic refugee situation as though it were more a problem for us than for the migrants. We have stopped caring about them. The reality of this on-going crisis is nothing short of a modern-day slave trade, with migrants treated as commodities. It’s as though nothing has changed in the 300 years since desert tribes used the very same routes to bring slaves to north Africa: Nigerian women told they are going to Italy to work as housemaids only to be trafficked into desert brothels with no idea when they might leave, young men cruelly beaten and held captive for months until their families pay a ransom

Three rival governments preside over the failed state of Libya, and the real power lies in the hands of armed militias. Libyans may rely on their own militias for protection, the migrants have nothing and no one to protect them.  Not only are desperate migrants at the mercy of people smugglers but also the authorities themselves – in the main, armed militias with no one to hold them to account and few other sources of income apart from the migrant trade. 

In the Libyan detention centres, migrants are locked up and left to rot. It’s a humanitarian disaster with barely any humanitarian organisations there to help. For tens of thousands of migrants in the country at the moment, they have no means of escape.   EU leaders have signed a deal with Libya. Far from helping people escape, this deal is aimed at keeping them there. The next step is to forcibly returning asylum seekers in Europe to Libyan prisons.

Despite the illusion of diversity we do all have more in common with workers worldwide than with the capitalist class as 95% of the worlds population own little more than their ability to work for a wage or a salary and the 5% capitalist class constitute a parasitic class to whose ends the diversity propaganda serves.. The overpopulation myth threatens to overtake the human nature myth as the chief explanation for the evils of the modern world where hunger, disease, the retarded development of backward countries, social unrest, political instability, urban sprawl, destruction of wildlife, city squalor, crowded mental hospitals, violence, all kinds of pollution and ecological upset, the shortage of housing and the desecration of the countryside are all confidently attributed to the problem of an excess of human beings. The readiness to accept the "overpopulation" argument arises from a lack of understanding of the way capitalism works.

The "overpopulation problem" is really a misuse of resources problem. Capitalism, as a system of rationing via the market, is justified in people's minds by a belief in scarcity. "There isn't enough to go round", so we must be restricted in what we are allowed to consume. It has become a cliché to speak of "this overcrowded planet” yet if, for example, the entire world's population were now placed in the United States, the population density in that country would still be little more than that of Holland.

It is not overpopulation is the problem but the private, corporate or state ownership of the means of production and distribution with its competitive ethos and accumulative 5% minority parasitic profit system allied with the coercive state apparatus and war machines to aid , back-up its plundering and wasteful use of nature given raw resources as well as the exploitation of the 95% human resources in pursuit of accumulation of profits.

We are more than capable, with a commonly owned world, of sustaining a superabundance of the necessities of life with production for use and not for sale, allied to free access to them, with democratic control exercised by all through delegation, not government or states allied to a self-regulating equilibrium of virtuous, holistically sustainable and ethical environmental standards. Poverty is caused in the developed world by capitalism, it takes place at the point of production. It is INEVITABLE. The political differences are small between the governing and aspirant governing parties and in the less developed world poverty is caused by the same capitalist exploitation of resources in which tribal and other organised clan, family or ethnic differences are exploited to capital's advantage in power grabs over natural resources and raw materials.


Each new mouth to feed produces a pair of hands to be exploited by the parasite class.
All wealth springs from labour. A democratic, post-capitalist, commonly-owned, production-for-use society can utilise resources and technology to introduce a fully automated luxury communism with free access to the wealth thus socially produced. We can run society ourselves, rid the planet of government over us, war between rival capitalist concerns over, trade routes, raw materials, markets and spheres of geopolitical interests.

 Housing and anything else in capitalism is produced to make a profit from market for a parasite class and not to satisfy human needs. Capitalism is responsible for this , deliberate creation and manipulation of markets in human misery and for driving down wages and reducing availability of essential commodities if profit is not derived form their production, not immigrants. We are quite capable of producing for use to satisfy all human needs and ushering in the post-capitalist future. If ownership and control of production and distribution was in the hands of all and production was for use instead of for profit, with free access,there would not be the same wasteful production in wasteful competition to satisfy markets with duplication of efforts, while human needs go unmet. Capitalism depends on poverty stricken workers selling their ability to work for a minimum ration of what they need to survive and reproduce future wage slaves and these conditions of waged slavery ensure a ready supply of workers to exploit now and in the future.


Wee Matt

Are You Really Your Own Boss?

For eighteen years, "Dangerous Dans" has been selling burgers in Toronto's east end, but will close on May 28, 2017, because its landlord, Pizza Nova, raised its rent 80%. To quote owner, James McKinnon, "If I opened seven days a week, four in the morning until late at night, I would generate enough revenue, but it would kill me." A spokesman for Pizza Nova said, "Any proposed increase is in line with market rates."

This writer is so bewildered. They told me, anyone can become his/her own boss, under capitalism and make it. Do you think I was conned? 

 Steve and John

Increased Technology/ Increased Want

On CBC News of February 8, 2017, they announced that in the last four years, seventy thousand jobs in manufacturing and farming, have been lost to technology, in Canada alone. One forty-seven-year old sheet metal worker, who had once made $37.00 an hour, was struggling to support his two daughters on Employment Insurance and struggling even more, with his self-esteem, or lack of.

As Charlie Chaplin said in, The Great Dictator, "Machinery that creates abundance has left us in want." 

The trouble is, it needn't be that way and we "can" do something about it.

 Steve and John

A movement of movements

Some of those who founded the Socialist Party in regard to trade unionism had a leaning towards industrial unionism, whilst others were inclined to view the trade unions unsympathetically as only another facet of capitalism. 

  The private and state ownership of the means whereby the people live produces in industry an unceasing conflict between the propertied parasite class and the property-less working class, a conflict manifesting itself in the form of strikes, work-to-rule go-slows and lock-outs. Workers in their endeavour to resist the encroachments of the exploiting class, and to secure higher wages, shorter hours, better conditions of labour, have largely organised themselves into Trade Unions. The capitalist class in its desire to wring more profits, rent, and interest out off the labour of the workers, has for years been organised into cabals, combines, and trusts with the object of controlling markets, raising prices, limiting production, reducing wages and intensifying labour.
 

The Socialist Party realising that this social conflict of hostile classes in society is preparing the way for the transformation of capitalist property into common ownership by limiting competition among the workers on the one hand and by combining and concentrating capital on the other, recommends its members to join the unions in their respective trades in order that by the spread of socialist enlightenment the members of the working class organised in trade unions may be enabled to carry out the class struggle with the efficiency which results alone from clearly defined class-conscious action and taught to translate the industrial conflict into the field of politics.

The Socialist Party urges upon the trade unionists and all other wage-workers to join the Socialist Party in order that they may proceed to the conquest of the powers of government as the indispensable preliminary to the overthrow and dispossession of the capitalist class and the establishment of a society in which the means and instruments for producing the necessaries, comforts and luxuries of life will be the common and democratically controlled property of the whole people.

The Socialist Party recognises that the working class must be organised both politically and economically for the safe-guarding of working class interests and the overthrow of capitalism, declares nevertheless the ultimate futility of any economic organisation not based on the principle of working-class solidarity and recognition of the class-struggle.

The Socialist Party seeing that the trade unions of this country are sectional in character and unconscious of the historic mission of the working-class, cannot give unreserved support to these organisations, which have been frequently manipulated to suit capitalist interests. Members of the Socialist Party are advised to form socialist groups inside their unions for the purpose of common counsel and joint action to counteract any abandonment of working-class interests and to educate their fellow members in the principles of the class-struggle.

The Socialist Party understands that the trade unions are essentially economic organisations and that when based upon and informed by correct principles they are capable of fulfilling their function as such. It demands from the Trade Unions a similar recognition that the political action of the working-class must be revolutionary, and the function of, and can only be taken by, the Socialist Party.

The political and economic organisations of the working-class should work together, in harmonious cooperation, and the Socialist Party desires, to this end, the affiliation of such unions as shall recognise the necessity for ending the wage-system and establishing the socialism.

Socialist Party, however, views the trade union movement as presently constituted as organised on an unsound basis. The Socialist Party declares that trade unionism is a necessary form of working-class organisation, but also declares that unless such unions are based upon the class-struggle they are insufficient and become ineffective.   The Socialist Party recommends that all members of the Party within trade unions be instructed to actively oppose all action of the unions that is not based on the principles of this Party. Therefore members of the Socialist Party, as trade unionists, must work for the conversion of their trade organisations to the sound economic position which alone fits the trade union to co-operate with the Socialist Party for the overthrow of capitalism.

Many are hungry for a change of direction. The strength and clarity of purpose needed in order to break free is going to require us to very thoughtful so as to knit our numerous diverse movements together. This doesn't mean a centralized hierarchy. Our society's allegiance and addiction to capitalism must be renounced and abandoned, if we want to see our way to a liveable future. The existing capitalist model of endless economic expansion and ceaseless capital accumulation is unsustainable. Clearly if we stubbornly persist down that path, collapse of the earth's life-sustaining ecosystems is inevitable. The signs are everywhere visible. Corporate interests are now in the driver's seat and they blithely ignore the facts, have utter contempt for truth, and couldn't care less for democracy, the environment or human rights.  We need to construct a new society. Capitalism is a failing economic philosophy which honours acquisition above sharing and cooperation. Capitalism is the antithesis of democracy. Capitalists do not cooperate they compete and seek to destroy competitors. Constant warfare is the history of capitalism.

We require the creation of a class-based political organization to raise the class consciousness of our fellow-workers. Unlike other sectors of the left, unions possess an infrastructure of buildings, meeting spaces, massive mailing lists and extensive administrative apparatuses. Participatory democracy is absolutely the best way to organize workers, because it is the only way that actually builds revolutionary consciousness, if, in fact, we do believe in the democratization of our labour unions.

The anarchist, Rudolf Rocker,  wrote  of unions serving as schools for the working class:

“… the trade union is by no means a mere transitory phenomenon bound up with the duration of capitalist society, it is the germ of the socialist society of the future, the elementary school of socialism in general. Every new social structure makes organs for itself in the body of the old organism. Without this preliminary any social evolution is unthinkable. Even revolutions can only develop and mature the germs which already exist and have made their way into the consciousness of men; they cannot themselves create these germs or create new worlds out of nothing. It therefore concerns us to plant these germs while there is still yet time and bring them to the strongest possible development, so as to make the task of the coming social revolution easier and to ensure its permanence.”

To be schools for socialism, unions must do more than simply mobilise. They must create structures that prepare workers for what are the ingredients of a socialist society.  It can serve as a big step towards preparing workers for control of their workplaces. The workers themselves must be collectively empowered.

How Things Sink Under Capitalism.

According to an issue of Canadian Jewish News, February 2, 2017, a few hours before Trump's inauguration, Obama ordered $221million to be given to the Palestinians. 

One needn't be brilliant to figure how they'll spend it. Then 'genius-head' Trump, bans immigration from countries whose populations he dislikes. The fact that these deals may not go through, isn't the point, which is, they would like them to.

So, we have two guys working at the most important job in the world, one after the other, taking action that will harm people. This is clearly indicative to how low things have sunk under capitalism.

So, let's help it sink a little lower - right into the garbage can of history. 

Steve and John.

Strange Bedfellows

In a recent episode of "Foyle's War" on TV Ontario, the main protagonist, Foyle, has to investigate the production, in the U.K., of German war materials - Yes, you read it right!

Based on a true story, and English-based subsidiary of, American-owned, Standard Oil, was producing fuel for German planes, both before and after Pearl Harbor. They shipped it in barrels, labeled 'whisky' to Tenerife, from where they were loaded onto German ships. The Luftwaffe needed the fuel to continue bombing Britain. 

As one of the company's owners said, "We don't care how we make a profit, business is business." 

Steve and John.

What is money

There is no truly independent country in the world, because international capitalism has made sure of this, and our own experience here in Britain, especially since 1964, should have brought it home to us. The past few years should have shown us just how independent Britain is, when foreign "bankers" tell the British government how to spend money, and how it must not spend money, in order to keep the international capitalist class happy. Workers have no country and a post-capitalist, wage-slavery free world to win.

Independence for Scotland therefore is a myth put about by the Scottish National Party, which further confuses the Scottish section of the working class and blinds them from the real struggle – the class struggle. The outcome of the class struggle is the abolition of capitalism and an end to poverty, insecurity and the ever-present threat of war. The SNP is just another capitalist supporting political party, as politically dishonest as Labour and Conservatives and Lib-Dems and Greens or UKIP. Don't follow leaders. Leadership is capitalist principle. How about getting rid of leaders and opting for working towards socialism as capitalism can not be reformed without war (by deed or proxy) and poverty (relative or absolute)?

Don't settle for crumbs take over the bakehouse as we, the 95 percent, produce all of the wealth. Abolish capitalism and its iniquitous wages system.   Marshall Sahlins, perceptively observed:
"The world's most primitive people have few possessions but they are not poor. Poverty is not a certain small amount of goods, nor is it just a relation between means and ends; above all, it is a relation between people. Poverty is a social status. As such, it is the invention of civilization" (Stone Age Economics).

In truth, the majority is impoverished. It is impoverished insofar as it has no other option than to sell its working abilities to those who monopolise the means of living and whose conspicuous wealth must irresistibly provide the very yardstick by which that poverty will be starkly exposed. This may not be the poverty of material destitution. But if the measure of a human being consists in the accumulation of material possessions to which he or she may claim the, by that token, we are demeaned. And, ultimately, it is in this devaluation of our human worth—not simply in the fact of material inequality but in the meaning this society attaches to it—that we may glimpse the very essence of this poverty. The basic income is not a solution, but another form of subsistence ration, effectively relative poverty, while wealth surpluses torrent upwards to an economically dominant capitalist parasite class.

Supporters of capitalism, especially the Von Mises school, may not be able to conceive of production without money and prices, but we socialists can. The definitive answer to your the "economic calculation problem" is a (largely) self-regulating system of stock control in which calculations are made in kind rather than in terms of a common unit like money.

And let us address those currency cranks who believe we can create money by a stroke of the keyboard. Surely, the recent banking crisis has exploded the myth about banks being able to create credit, i.e. money to lend out at interest, by a mere stroke of the pen but apparently not.

Financial crises always spark interest in critics of the system. They see the problems of capitalism—like its vulnerability to crises—as primarily financial in origin. The whole point of production under capitalism is not the satisfaction of needs, but the accumulation of money. In other words, it’s impossible to separate the economic world into a good productive side and a bad financial side; the two are inseparable.

The monetary surpluses generated in production—the profits of capitalist businesses—accumulate over time and demand some sort of outlet: bank deposits, bonds, stocks, whatever. It’s going to be that way until we replace capitalism with something radically different. What we need to ask is why people today tend to blame banks rather than capitalism as a whole.

No bank can lend more than it has, either as deposits or what it has itself borrowed. The idea that money is created through fractional reserve banking is more of a metaphor.

No point in the socialist case arouses such controversy as that of the abolition of money and wages. Marx identified money as one of the two main manifestations of human alienation (the other was the state) and looked forward to its abolition in a communist society where human values would apply: where the standard by which something would be considered ‘valuable’ would be human welfare.

Marx also fully endorsed the slogan “Abolition of the Wages System!” a system which he regarded as a form of slavery. Money is just a means of saying ‘This is mine, not yours’.

Money in various limited forms existed for hundreds of years before the advent of capitalism but because it is an indispensable element in the workings of capitalism its general usage expanded universally with the development of that system. For a start, it is the device whereby capitalism separates the worker from the fruits of his or their labour; an indispensable part of the process whereby a minority class of capitalists ration the consumption of the great majority who as workers of one sort or another produce all the real wealth of society.

Marx saw money as having two basic functions: (1) a medium of exchange or circulation, i.e. the means through which articles produced for sale get bought and sold; and (2) a measure of value, i.e. a common unit in which the value of articles produced for sale can be expressed as a price, and is thus a standard by which they can be compared.

Marx also identified two kinds of paper token money: tokens that were convertible on demand into a fixed amount of the money-commodity and tokens which were not. The former created no problem. The latter, however, could create a problem if they were issued in a greater amount than the amount of the money-commodity that would otherwise circulate. In this case, if they circulated alongside gold or silver, the value of the tokens would depreciate, i.e. they would buy less than their face-value. If they were the only currency (as is the case today) this would result in a rise in the general price level, i.e. in a change in the standard of price.

An inconvertible paper currency has to be managed by the government or some state institution such as a central bank which, to avoid depreciation or inflation, has to calculate the correct amount to issue. In Marx’s day the case where the only currency was paper token money was a hypothetical one which he only discussed in passing.

"Paper coin, that forgery
Of the title-deeds which we
Hold to something of the worth
Of the inheritance of earth."
Shelley

Wee Matt