Scottish Nationalism (1968)

From the May 1968 issue of the Socialist Standard In the Scottish National Party, they must feel that somebody up there likes them. Right now they are on top of the world and everywhere the signs are apparent. The Party badge— a hipped-up thistle—sprouts as thickly as the weed itself. Membership has rocketed to over ninety thousand, and all the frenzied electoral activity has resulted in the election of a Nationalist M.P. Undoubtedly, independence is the current big issue and the Nationalists claim they will have it by the early ’seventies. How have the SNP been transformed from the old image of a bunch of Tartan-clad cranks into a considerable political force? The Party is still the expression of some “Professional” and small-business people who see their advancement in breaking with England, but they now enjoy what they never had before—widespread working class support, although how constant this remains to be seen. This support was a long time coming, but the breakthrough was helped by Labour’s long absence from power during the ’fifties. This resulted in some of Labour’s traditional support, particularly among the lower paid, switching to the Nationalists. Another factor was disillusionment with the performance of Labour controlled Town Councils. Thus, the Nationalists got what they needed above all—a foot in the electoral door. What are the forces behind the Nationalist upsurge? Of course, the movement’s “intellectuals” see it as a revolt by a people yearning to return to a Golden Age which existed before the Act of Union of 1707, when a united populace shared a “Scottish Culture” which was the envy of Europe. The idea is absurd. The culture of the untamed, Celtic Highlander was completely different from that of the settled, English-speaking Lowlander. Indeed, Dr. J. M. Beale makes this very point in the Book, Common Errors in Scottish History. Today, in the populous industrial belt, the average inhabitant will sneer at the sight of the Kilt and a significant proportion owes their loyalties to Ireland rather than Scotland. Even so, Nationalist feeling certainly exists and is implanted at an early age. This is very important in any country’s educational system. Also important is regional pride within a country. Ruling groups find this useful, particularly in a time of war—how many Scotsmen have died proving that they were the bravest in the land? So Scottish children have their heads filled with the deeds of national heroes like Wallace and Bruce while the feats of Scots in civil life—Carnegie, Watt, Stevenson—also receive much attention. In sport, especially soccer, the press give the full treatment to encounters with “The Auld Enemy”, with every victory a “Bannockburn” and every defeat a “Flodden”. All this, against a background of Scotland’s historical subjugation by England, has provided a breeding ground for national illusion and resentment. But why is the revolt happening now rather than ten or twenty years ago? First, there is the decline of the long-established industries with the accompanying hardship and insecurity. Engineering, Shipbuilding, and Mining were what Scotland depended on and their cut-back has meant a chronic high unemployment rate. Secondly, the main Parties have been tried over and over and found wanting: they cannot produce the goods, so where else to go? In England many people faced with this dilemma have turned to the Liberals. In Scotland, in the same circumstances, it can only be the SNP. In short, the Nationalist upsurge is really a revolt against a depressed standard of living, and this is where the SNP makes its biggest impact. Every example of lower wages, higher prices, more emigration and less amenities than south of the border is seized upon and skilfully used. The most interesting point about the demand for independence is that, basically, it is in line with the growing idea that the problems of modem society—Capitalism—lie in its sheer size. Thus, we see the Liberals arguing for smaller administrative units through more Regional Government; the Anarchists and some leftists for smaller productive units through worker-owned factories, and the Scots and Welsh Nationalists for smaller political units as exemplified by the Scandinavian countries. Sweden, with its allegedly high living standards and full employment, is quoted as an example of how smallness plus independence equals prosperity. These theories are false. Capitalism's problems are the result of non-social ownership of the means of life in the field of social production: more diversity of government or of ownership cannot alter this fact. Nor can the national identity or location of the legislature have much effect on our standard of living. This is influenced by such as the degree of technical and natural resources and, more especially, the state of the world market—what can be sold profitably—and any serious change in this will affect Sweden just as it did in the ’thirties. Anyway, Sweden’s full employment is due to acute labour shortage, and those Irish workers who had a spell in Swedish Shipyards soon returned home, unimpressed by the living standards. Another Nationalist argument is that there is a deliberate “trend” towards more numerous and smaller Nations and point to the seventy-odd newcomers which have sprung-up over the last twenty years. These have emerged owing to the disintegration of the European colonial Empires. The Nationalists ignore the fact that in the developed world the trend is the opposite way. Nor do these new Nations choose to be small; in fact they are as large as they can get and often squabble with one another over disputed territory and resources. What it all boils down to, is that the SNP just don’t understand the world around them. Although they claim to be against exploitation they support the production for profit system. Arthur Donaldson, the Party’s chief spokesman, even invites capital to take advantage of "cheap” and "tame” Scottish workers (Scots Independent, 11/2/67). It is time to reject the notion that there are "Scottish problems” which apply exclusively to Scottish workers and which can be solved by a "Parliament of their own”. Instead of turning their eyes to Scandinavia, those of them who thronged "prosperous” London recently on the occasion of the seating of the Nationalist MP should have looked across the Thames to Southwark, Battersea and Brixton. They would have seen plenty of hardship there, despite the proximity of Parliament. And did it not occur to those who saw the TV epic of the homeless, Cathy Come Home, that the action took place in an English City? Above all else, independence will not mean their release from wage-slavery, and, as everywhere, access to the means of life will be governed by whether the owners find it profitable or not. Socialists echo the Poet’s desire for the day 'That man to man the world o’er shall brothers be for a' that”. This will be a fact when the world's wealth, owned in common, can be utilised for the satisfaction of all mankind. Capitalism, with its attendant national boundaries and prejudices, makes this just another Poet’s dream. Vic Vanni (Glasgow)

What Over-population Problem?

Scotland’s birth rate is falling.

Births are more than a third less than needed to maintain our working age population. All the while, the number of deaths registered exceeds births as our population shrinks.

There’s been negligible overall growth since the 1961 census. Our 2011 survey gave Scotland just 100,000 more people. All of those were pensioners.

In the first five months of this year, Registers of Scotland has recorded only 21,742 births. Last year, births were 664 higher during those same months. Ten years ago there were 3,275 more births.

https://www.thecourier.co.uk/fp/opinion/readers-letters/455532/scotland-needs-urgent-population-boost/

The world under new ownership

“He who owns the means whereby I live, owns me” - Shakespeare 

Ownership and control of the means of production are inseparable. The State, in the hands of the capitalists, is used as a terrific weapon of class warfare.  Some people confuse the term State with Society and regard them as synonymous. Actually, the State arose with the institution of private property and became the authority of propertied interests over society in the name of society. The State was obliged to intervene in industrial disputes partly as conciliator and regulator though always as the custodian of property interests. It governs society in the interests of property and can do no other.  The State does not rush to the rescue of the working class. The questions of ownership and control became principal questions. The demand for the nationalisation of this and that industry became popular. The machine of State becomes larger, its powers of repression grows enormously and wage-slavery remains. Class-war continues. Capitalist production is for the purpose of securing profit through the exploitation, ruination and enslavement of the working people. Ownership is what gives the capitalist class power of life or death over the working class and over society as a whole. 

The questions of ownership and control become principal questions. For the workers the old order has to go. Socialism is a class-free society based upon common ownership. In socialist society the means of production have ceased to be capital, that is, to be a means of exploitation. In socialist society there are no longer an employing class or a State with a monopoly of property in the means of production and the majority deprived of property in the means of production.  Socialist ownership of the means of production gives rise to mutual relations between people engaged in the production process which are quite different from those obtaining under capitalism. Private property in the means of production inevitably divides people, gives rise to relations of domination and subordination and to the exploitation of some people by others, evokes antagonism of interests, class struggle and competition. On the other hand, social ownership of the means of production unites people, ensures a genuine community of interests and comradely co-operation. The social ownership of production means that socialist production is freed from the contradiction, inherent in capitalism, between the social character of production and the private capitalist form of appropriating its fruits.

The original role of money was to serve as a medium, a standard that made easier the exchange of one commodity for another. But under capitalism, this medium of exchange has taken off with a life of its own. For the capitalist, the aim of production is to produce goods to exchange and not to use, but instead it is a compulsory drive to accumulate capital through exploitation–simply put, to make more money. Once money becomes the aim of production, labour power has to become a commodity. In other words, a worker’s labour power can be bought and sold. Besides the fact that people must be legally free–that is, not slaves owned by others or serfs tied to the land–the labourer must have lost all means of production and thus all ability to produce either for consumption or exchange for himself. An example of this is peasants being driven off the land. Labour power as a commodity is the necessary complement of the private ownership of the means of production by the capitalists. Only by buying the worker’s labour power can the capitalist make profits. Workers produce more than what the capitalist pays them in wages and benefits. This is the basis of exploitation of the workers. What the workers produce over and beyond the socially necessary labour for keeping themselves and their families alive and working is surplus value. Surplus value is the only source of profits and is ripped off by the capitalists.

We have in capitalism a colossal concentration of wealth on the one side and poverty on the other side. We have in a world of stupendous riches unknown in all history: no abundance, no peace, no security, no full employment anywhere on the planet. These social evils are not bred in the heart of man; they are bred by capitalism, and by nothing else. To live, you, the worker, must not only work for the owners of the means of production and exchange – you must guarantee them a profit. Working for them is not enough; a profit is absolutely required for you to get your job; and that profit can be obtained in no other wise except by exploiting that which is your only real possession – namely your physical or mental capacity to work. That is all the workingman or woman has.  The capitalist must accumulate in order to exist. To accumulate, he must be assured profit. To profit, he must exploit labour. There is no other way. Capitalists always seek to intensify exploitation; labour always and necessarily seeks to resist exploitation. Capitalism seeks what is rightfully its own, from its point of view: the maximum that it can get out of the worker. Labour seeks what is rightfully its own: that’s why it forms class organisations, labour unions.

Socialism demands not only the collective ownership of the means of production but the control of the working class. Anything less than that may be anything you want; it is not and never will be socialism.

Our Revolution

At times we have an inability to see what is in front of our own eyes. Imagine a world run along truly democratic lines. There would be no politicians. People can show incredible acts of kindness to and sacrifice for others, even strangers. Some will even give up their own lives for strangers.  Human life is a product of the evolution of life on earth. Human life is not independent and separate from the planet but a part of it. The relationship of human species with nature and all life forms is that of interdependence. We must not embrace the despair of a bleak future that capitalism is creating. We must acknowledge acts of resistance, even if it appears futile, as small victories. Our character and dignity will be measured by our ability to resist the malignant forces that seem to hold us in a death grip. Our technology and science will not save us. The future of humanity is now in our own hands. At best, we can mitigate the misery. We cannot avoid it. We are fighting for our survival and we must build militant social movements of sustained rebellion. It is a lot to demand. But if we do not succeed, the human race will disappear. We have the technology to build alternative energy and food systems, but the capitalist industry has blocked all meaningful attempts to curb fossil fuel extraction and reduce energy consumption. And meat, dairy and egg producers, responding to consumer demand, are responsible for the emission of more greenhouse gases than the entire global transportation sector. Livestock generates enormous amounts of methane, which is 86 times more destructive than CO2. Livestock also produces 65 percent of nitrous oxide resulting from human activity, a gas that has 296 times the “Global Warming Potential” of carbon dioxide. The massive animal agriculture industry, like the fossil fuel industry, receives billions of dollars in subsidies. And pliant politicians do the bidding of these industries receive millions in return from lobbyists in legalized bribery. And it won’t stop until this political system is destroyed. Governments, if they were instruments of the common good, would free themselves from being held captive by corporations and end the profit system which takes precedence over human health and even human survival.

Critics of socialism are wedded to a strawman notion of socialism as some kind of cornucopian society of absolute super-abundance - all the more easy to knock it down. But this is not what is being proposed. What is being proposed is something rather more modest and reasonable - that we can today adequately meet our human needs (which are not infinite but finite) but increasingly capitalism gets in the way of this happening. The technological capacity to satisfy the basic needs of everyone on this planet for food, shelter, sanitation and so on exists today. However, it is capitalism that is increasingly thwarting this potential. Mostly, the productive possibilities at our disposal are not being realised because of the huge and ever-growing proportion of work undertaken today that is entirely socially useless but is nevertheless indispensable to the operation of the capitalist system itself. Thus, a vast and steadily growing proportion of the work carried out today does not in any meaningful sense enhance human wellbeing and welfare but merely exists to serve the functional needs of the system itself.

Free access entails - amongst other things, a self-regulating system of stock control which of its very nature is capable of responding very rapidly to shifts in demand. If people come to reduce their demand for a particular product this will manifest itself in a build-up of surpluses, prompting distribution points to cut back their orders from suppliers who, in turn, will reduce their inputs for said good from their own suppliers and so on the further back along the production chain. The opposite would happen if people increased their demand for a good. This would automatically trigger a signal for more of such a good and hence the inputs for such a good. The point is all this is perfectly possible today and more so now with the development of computerised system of stock control. A self-regulating system of stock control which responds directly and promptly to changes in the pattern of demand from both production units and consumers provides the necessary data we need relating to stocks of inputs. It then becomes a matter of economising most on what is scarcest. The "relative scarcity" of any input is a function of the demand for the end product of which it is a component and of the technical ratio of input to output (or the product itself). In this way, it is quite possible to rank the relevant inputs in terms of their relative scarcity. So selection of the least cost combination is entirely practicable in a communist society. Only the method of doing it is quite different to what happens with a common unit of accounting. It is what I call a "lateral" approach to cost accounting rather than a "vertical" approach. We select technical combinations of inputs that minimise as far as possible our reliance upon scarce inputs in favour of more abundant alternatives. This is not an exact science but it’s the orientation of decision-making that counts - the fact that we are operating within a systemic constraint that pushes us always in the direction of economising most on what is most scarce - which makes it an eminently sensible and reasonable principle to apply.

There’s no end to the maladies that ail workers these days and it is understandable that they will seek to alleviate their exploitation. Regularly on progressive websites and magazines, articles spring up promoting the empowerment of the working class by suggesting for what the authors believe to be radical new ways of organising the economy – making capitalism more people-friendly. How the authors dislike being reminded that they are regurgitating political ideas that have a proven track record of failure. The Socialist Party only hopes that our fellow-workers are not duped into believing that such proposals offer any fundamental improvements in their condition. Despite widespread anxiety and discontent the liberals and the left have been unable to respond or develop determined workers' movement in any meaningful sense so they resurrect past ideas, re-package them to sell once again. 

Manifesto for a decent future

Imagine if instead of fighting one another to defend the interests of our masters, we began to protect the people and the planet against our common threats: profiteering, poverty war, and nationalism. This is not some ridiculous utopian dream but simply recognising the greater good rather than the petty political or economic divisions. Imagining the world without hunger, conflict or disease isn't impossible.  The future of humanity needn't be about the power-hungry and war-mongering elite. Socialism is not the absence of rules, it is just the absence of rulers. This dysfunctional society stems directly from the capitalist economic system. Socialism focuses on reclaiming earth's resources for the people – all the people. It will replace the money-based exchange economies with a production for use world economy, restoring our damaged natural environment to the best of our ability by developing and using clean renewable energy sources, redesigning cities, transport, industrial systems, and agriculture so that they efficiently and ecologically provide for the needs of all people. If you want a better world, you have to rise up from your knees and make it so. Police, prisons and the military would no longer be necessary when goods, services, healthcare, and education are freely available to all people. There is no such thing as a fixed human nature where people are pre-programmed attitudes, values and behaviour by their DNA. It can be changed, it has been changed multiple times before.

 Socialism proposes a system that brings out the best in every individual. We should be the generation that finally brings down capitalism and creates a decent, sustainable world. There is no reason to be confused about what we want. We want the ruling class off our backs. We don’t want to be exploited or alienated. We don’t want to be wage-slaves. We want to be a free self-governing people, organised and administered by a net-work of inter-linked and connected workers councils, community assemblies. We can reorder our social lives through these social forms, in varying mixes and degrees. Socialist  revolution means rearranging ourselves socially. To establish the society we want means building a world based on mutual aid.

We all have dreams. For most of us, those dreams are often quite simple. They are common to individuals and communities all around the world. People just want a future where their families don’t just survive but thrive.  For far too many people in far too many places, such simple dreams never seem to be fulfilled. No matter how hard they work they are missing out on the opportunity to benefit from the ever increasing technological miracles. In fact, they suffer and are being left behind.  The Socialist Party has to send clear messages that if the planet is well managed, we can provide not just enough to get by but a place where individuals and communities can build a future. It should be clear to all workers that the working class, if they are to escape from the misery of capitalism, must first understand their class position, and must then build up a socialist political party for the purpose of capturing the powers of government in order to introduce socialism. This is the only solution of the economic problems of the working class. All else will leave them wage-slaves still.

I am not interested in politics,” is a statement that is made with monotonous regularity.  Needless to say the General Election wasn’t nonsense to the capitalist class, who were once again confirmed by it in their position in society. Socialism requires that there is a majority of workers who understand and want it. That consciousness immunises a socialist against the deceits and the assurances which bolster the politics of capitalism. 

 The Socialist Party has no blood on our hands, having never once supported a war for capitalist interests. Every war since has been exposed and opposed, even when our comrades were thrown into prison cells for their principles. We have never collaborated with any capitalist government, unlike the tacticians of the Left who have accepted our view that the Labour Party is anti-working-class until election times when they have consistently told workers to vote Labour. Never once have we made any concessions to racist or nationalist sentiments, and from our inception declared against racism and sexism in all their forms. We have not lied about the possibility of reforming capitalism so as to make it tolerable to live under.

Whilst never opposing reforms which might alleviate the lives of the wealth-producing majority, we have consistently and. at the risk of unpopularity, stood firmly against reformism and the illusion that capitalism can somehow be made decent. We have kept alive the socialist vision of common ownership never once confusing that with the state-capitalist proposal for placing the profit system under new management of nationalisation. We have stood out not for fair wages but for the abolition of wage labour; not for more money for the poor but for the abolition of money and thereby the end of poverty; not for the welfare crumbs but free and equal access for all to the abundant resources of this rich and fruitful planet. And we have never flinched from advocating revolution as our goal. Ours has never been to ask the bosses for a share of the loaf; only when conscious and democratically organized workers take the means of life will the world be ours. The Socialist Party has every reason to be proud of itself. That we have survived is an achievement. It has not been without effort and personal costs to those who have stuck to their commitments. here is far too much work to be done for us to bathe in the lethargic complacency of nostalgic self-congratulation. We are a movement, not a monument.

Armed with understanding, the workers can build a new society that will be well worth while living in. The building of this new society must and can only be the work of the workers themselves; they cannot expect help from above, for privilege will hang on until it is shaken from its perch. In this new society there will be no privileged idlers; unless they have physical disabilities, each will play his or her part according to his or her ability. The citizens of the socialist community will work voluntarily because they are doing a job they love, for the benefit of society as a whole—i.e., in the long run, for themselves. All labour in the socialist society will be essential and useful. There will be no need to try to stop people from doing wasteful and unessential things, like pouring luxuries into the lap of already overfed and jaded parasites. The future belongs to the workers, and the capitalists are already trembling at the vision.

The Gospel According To St. Andrew (1907)

“ Dunfermline's Carnegie Library has been recently renovated so perhaps it is timely to remember the man himself .

From the April 1907 issue of the Socialist Standard Andrew Carnegie, library purveyor and morality expert (what a tribe of experts there seems to be in the world) has been at it again, He thinks “wealth is so obviously unequally distributed that the attention of civilised man must he attracted to it from time to time.” He adds "no amount of charity in spending fortunes in any way compensates for misconduct in making them.” He quotes with approval President Roosevelt's statement that he “would discriminate in the sharpest way between fortunes well won and fortunes ill won, between those gained well as a whole and those gained in evil fashion by keeping just within the bounds of mere law honesty.” and concludes, “There are fortunes swollen beyond all healthy limits; but I say my partners are the people ” ! Dear, good Saint Andrew! His partners are the people. How true ! How trite! Of course they are all in the firm. All partners of the somnolent variety — sleeping partners in short. And while they sleep Andrew may sing on and preen his flight feathers prettily, preparatory to taking his place in the angelic choir wherein he has already, with canny prescience, booked a prominent place, as I doubt not. Well for Andrew, now and presently, if his shrewdness impel him to take his departure before his sleeping partners wake; for I fear the much that it will be woe indeed for Andrew if he should in that day be with us in the flesh.  “There are fortunes swollen beyond all healthy limit” Most upright judge!  "No amount of charity in spending fortunes in any way compensates for misconduct in making them.” Oh 'a Daniel come to judgment.’ What a lead for the “partners" when they wake!' Under the spur of such urging, under the whip of such counsel, how readily will they locate the owner of the fortune which, despite all its possessor's widely advertised and loudly lauded efforts to dispose of it, persists in accumulating without even a hand-stir effort on the part of its owner; and how quick will they be to recognise this “fortune swollen beyond all healthy limit.” And when they hear the story of Pittsburg and how the history of its rise and development has stank in the nostrils of ‘‘civilised man” for years, in what a flash will come the appreciation of the inwardness of Andrew’s other pronouncement as to the insufficiency of charity to compensate for the methods by which fortunes are built up. Verily there is a great day in store for the “partners” and for Andrew—when the sleepers wake. And one of the surest signs that the “partners” still snore, is in the fact that Andrew can walk abroad giving off his smug and unctuous dicta without risk of more than a halting effort at half humourous protest even from the most desperately “advanced ” organs of public opinion. Well, the sleepers will not always sleep. There’s a good time coming and the Laird of Skibo’s share in that good time may not be altogether what he would himself design. And I’m not quite sure that, assuming he has left us before that day dawns, he will be quite happy in that “undiscovered country from whose bourne’’ etc. I claim no special knowledge in the matter, but I am reminded of the story told, upon as good authority as any story of the sort, of the experience of one, Pullman, who at one time was in the sleeping car business (these sleeping care were not much used, I believe, by Andrew’s sleeping “partners” referred to). It chanced that Pullman died and found himself at heaven’s gate whereat he knocked loudly. In response to his peremptory summons Peter appeared and of him Pullman demanded admittance. “And who are you?” asked Peter. “I’m Pullman,” answered the applicant, “ Pullman, of Pullman, U.S.A.” “Ah!” said Peter, “1 think we have heard something of you. Will you be good enough to wait a moment while I refer to my instructions?” And Peter opened a large book on his janitor’s desk. "Well, hurry up then,” quoth Pullman. “I’m not accustomed to being detained in this way. My time’s precious.” Peter turned the leaves leisurely. “Don't worry,” said he. “Time doesn’t matter quite so much here as it does where you came from. Ah! here we are. Pullman of Pullman, U.S.A. M—yes! I thought I was not mistaken. Will you kindly take a seat in the lift yonder.” Pullman entered the lift and waited. The liftman made no sign. “Well, what's the matter? Why don’t you start?” he asked. “There’s no hurry,” replied the liftman. "I’m expecting a few more along shortly. We generally fill up fairly quick.” Pullman stumped about impatiently and one or two more came in, but the lift was still not full. “Come! Come!” he said, “I shan’t get in to-day if you’re much longer. When are we going up?” "Sir,” replied the attendant, “ this lift does not go up!”  A. James

Our Socialist Future

Capitalism can be reformed. It can be reformed in many ways. But it cannot be reformed in such a manner as to effect an essential improvement in the working class conditions of life. It cannot be reformed in such a manner as to raise the workers from the poverty level. Reforms, insofar as they have had any effect, have been effective simply by preventing the workers from sinking too far below the poverty level, their function being to do no more than preserve the workers as able-bodied means of production. 

It is not in the nature of capitalist society to provide better conditions for its slave class. The efficient operation of capitalist industry requires not only a capable working class, it requires a working class always at the beck and call of the master class. Only by keeping the workers bordering on necessity at all times can this condition be assured. The whiplash of poverty is far more effective than any coercive force could be in keeping them tied to the machine and subservient to their masters.

Those who would administer the affairs of capitalism are limited in their endeavours by the requirements of capitalism, and even though they would bend every energy to lighten the burdens of the workers, the system itself inevitably reduces the results to disheartening proportions.

Practically all of the reform legislation on the statute books of the capitalist world has been placed there by capitalist parties. The capitalists have never been noted for their generosity towards the workers, but they are practical gentlemen and they have long known that the smooth and economical operation of their system requires periodic additions to the mountains of reforms. Reforms to them are like a vile tasting tonic that must be taken from time to time for the protection of their health and well-being. Workers who live under poor sanitary conditions are ready victims of ailments which often develop into communicable diseases; and diseases do not respect the superior and necessary persons of capitalists. Moreover, workers afflicted by ailments spend time at home that could better be spent in the factory turning out surplus values for the factory owner. They must be protected against these conditions. They must also be protected against malnutrition, accidents, etc., in order that their efficiency as cogs in the wealth producing machine may not be impaired. They must even be provided for when they are unemployed, for the repressive measures of bygone days are no longer sufficient to deal with the vastly increased number of workers thrown periodically into the scrapheap by modern industry. It is now more economical to provide them with necessities than to maintain a coercive force great enough to prevent them from helping themselves. Besides, as in times of war or other periods of trade expansion, their services may be required again. 

Hence the measures dealing with sanitation and housing, sickness and accidents, health and unemployment! Hence the reforms piled upon reforms, reaching to the heavens! Hence the gradual conversion of the workers into destitute wards of the state!

There is a further reason for the acceptance of reform measures by the parties of the capitalist class. The workers form the immense majority of the members of society. They are the ones who suffer most from the evils of capitalism. They are only too conscious of the existence, if not the cause, of these evils, and they are ever ready to lend their support to whoever will promise redress. No party can govern without the consent of the workers. The capitalists, in consequence, must be ever ready with the required promises, if they are to protect their exclusive right to govern. Reforms that are not desirable to them can frequently be sidetracked afterwards, together with flattering appeals to the workers for loyalty, understanding and co-operation. Where they cannot be sidetracked, these reforms can always be watered down and presented with fanfares and glowing self-praise. It is an easy game to play, and while it does not give the workers very much, neither does it cost the capitalists very much, and it frequently assures for them a period of contentedness on the part of their slaves.

“The history of all hitherto existing society (that is, all written history) is the history of class struggles. “Freeman and slave, patrician and plebeian, lord and serf, guild master and journeyman, in a word, oppressor and oppressed, stood in constant opposition to one another, carried on an uninterrupted, now hidden, now open fight, a fight that each time ended, either in a revolutionary reconstitution of society at large, or in the common ruin of the contending classes.” – Communist Manifesto. 

The class struggle is the product of class-divided society. It exists no less today than in the class societies of history. By means of political action the oppressed classes of the past strove to gain their emancipation. The form that this action took was dictated by the conditions then existing. By means of political action – and by no other means – can the workers gain their emancipation. The politics of the working class form the subject matter to be discussed below.

Society rests on an economic basis. The manner in which wealth is produced and distributed determines the form of existing society. The development of the productive forces calls periodically upon mankind to adapt society to the changed economic conditions. Modern industry ushered capitalism into existence. It now demands that capitalism pass out of the picture, to be replaced by a new form of society, one that will conform to the needs of the developing means of production, and, therefore, to the essential needs of mankind. It is the duty – the imperative mission – of the working class to undertake this task.

Capitalism has outlived its usefulness. Within its confines can be found no solution for the wretchedness and insecurity endured by the workers. Not more than momentary relief has ever resulted from the generations of effort to improve their conditions of life. Even their trade unions – their most potent weapon in these activities – have been forced to remain for the most part on the defensive, struggling not so much to improve their conditions as to prevent these conditions from becoming worse. Socialism offers the only way out. The failure of the workers to recognize this fact – no matter what else they may do – can result only in the preservation of things as they are, with the prospect of darker days ahead.

Capitalist Parties

In the main the world’s workers have in the past given their support to parties openly representing capitalist society. The principal agencies for spreading education and information have, throughout the period of capitalism’s existence, been under the control of the capitalist class and have been used for the purpose of fostering and preserving the illusion that there is no practicable alternative to capitalism. Incessant, insidious propaganda is levelled at the workers from the cradle to the grave, designed to cloud their minds in their own interests and protect the dominant position of the capitalist class. They are taught that their interests are tied up with the interests of their masters and that only in the solution of the latter’s problems can the solution of their own problems be found. It is no wonder, therefore, that for generations they have been only too willing to give their support to one or another of the various capitalist parties.

Capitalist parties represent, first of all, capitalism. They may differ as to the manner in which the affairs of capitalism ought to be conducted. They may differ as to the sections of the capitalist class whose interests ought to be the most favored. But they are united in their opposition to those who would end capitalism. They are united even in opposing any effort to provide the workers with a greater share of the wealth which they produce. These parties are represented in the English speaking world by such groups as the Liberals and Conservatives of Great Britain and Canada and by the Republicans and Democrats of the United States. All of them are servants of the ruling class.

SOCIALIST PRINCIPLES

A Message from the Socialist Party of Canada

Capitalist ideas dominate the political economic and social scene for the capitalist own and control the means of propagation, education, information and news. Thus, all discussion and debate is undertaken on their terms. It should be clear, then, that bosses ideology serves capitalist interests not only when it provides pro-capitalist solutions to pressing social problems but also when it confuses people, or makes them overly pessimistic and resigned, or makes it difficult for them to formulate criticisms or imagine alternative systems.

The Socialist Party of Canada and its companion parties in the United States, Great Britain, India and New Zealand stand alone in their respective countries in their consistent advocacy of the socialist solution. Their examination of society has taught them that nothing less than socialism can suffice, and they have adopted a common set of socialist principles (first formulated by the Socialist Party of Great Britain) which constitutes the basis of their movement and their conditions of membership. Adherence to these principles makes possible their steady insistence upon the fact that the immediate need of the working class is: 

The establishment of a system of society based upon the common ownership and democratic control of the means and instruments for producing and distributing wealth by and in the interest of society as a whole.

These parties at present form only the nucleus of the great working class movement which must finally rise to bring this program into effect. The workers cannot depend upon others to do the job for them. It is a job that requires conscious and deliberate effort on their part. It is a job which they must do themselves.

Many and varied have been the interpretations that have been placed upon Socialism. Stalinism and Hitlerism have both been described as socialism. At different times socialism has been announced in New Zealand, New South Wales, London, Vienna and points west. Labor parties frequently come forward with lengthy lists of reforms or elaborate plans for “nationalization”, or “socialization”, and describe these as socialism. Workers must guard against such nonsense if they are not to be fooled by political highbinders, social quacks, or people who have themselves been fooled. For this reason among others the socialists stress the necessity for socialist education. The workers must understand socialism before they can serve usefully in the struggle for its attainment.

Social reform is not socialism. Neither is government ownership. Socialism has not yet been established in any country. It exists today only as an independent working class movement striving against the opposition of capitalist and labor parties alike, its energies directed without deviation towards a single goal. There are no short cuts to socialism. It can be reached only through the conscious political organization of the working class. But with that organization accomplished, no obstacle can stand in the road. Socialism may be had for the taking. Take it.

The workers must ultimately turn to socialism as the only means of finding release from the problems of capitalism. Even though it were possible (which it is not) for the present system to provide considerably improved conditions for the workers, that would still be no justification in the eyes of an informed persons for its continued existence. It has solved the problem of wealth production, but it has failed to solve the problem of distribution. It divides the labors of the workers between production and a myriad of unnecessary activities related to distribution. It is wasteful and destructive of men and materials. Its conflicts over markets, trade routes and sources of raw materials breed wars that grow ever more terrible in their dimensions. It is a haven of luxury and idleness for a useless parasite class. It is a fetter on further social progress. 

Socialism solves the problem of distribution. Its introduction will mean the conversion of all the means of production and distribution from private or class property into the common property of all the members of society. Goods will no longer be produced for sale; they will be produced for use. The guiding principle behind the operations of industry will be the requirements of mankind, not the prospects of profit. Production under socialism will be pre-determined, and distribution effected with neither advertising nor sales staff, thus reducing wasted materials to the minimum and making possible the transfer of great numbers of workers to desired occupations.

The ending of exchange relationships will bring at the same time the ending of an exchange medium. There being neither sale nor profit associated with the production and distribution of goods, neither will there be money in any of its forms. Currency, credit and banking, whether private or “socialized”, will pass out of existence.

The advent of common property means the abolition of private or class property, which in turn means the abolition of class society together with the class struggle. The antagonistic classes of today will become merged in a people with common interests, and the former capitalists will have the opportunity of becoming useful members of society. This will not only remove the greatest of the burdens resting today on the backs of the workers, it will also further augment the available labor supply, by the inclusion of the capitalists and their former personal attendants, thus contributing to the general reduction in labor time needed to produce society’s requirements.

Since unemployment means not only idleness but also severance from the means of subsistence, such a condition could not exist under socialism. That there will be plenty of leisure time, however, is beyond question. It will be the conscious aim of society to constantly reduce the obligations of its members to production, thereby providing ever-increasing leisure time in which to enjoy the proceeds of their labour.

Wars constitute another wretched feature of capitalist society that will come to an end under socialism. Since they arise from the struggle of the capitalists over markets, etc., and since these struggles will no longer play a part in the affairs of society, they will remain only as a ghastly memory from a horrible past.

Socialism will not solve all the problems of human society. But it will solve all the basic economic difficulties that are a constant source of torture to so many of its members. The solution of a single one of these difficulties would warrant its introduction. The solution of them all renders it imperative.  

The Scottish Drink Problem

22 people a week died from alcohol-related causes in Scotland in 2015, 54% higher than in England and Wales. The alcohol-related death rate was more than twice as high in men as in women, with 30 deaths per 100,000 of the population in men compared with 13.8 deaths for women.

Alcohol-related death rates were six times higher in the 10% most-deprived areas than in the 10% least deprived. The report highlighted inequalities, with alcohol-related stays in hospital nearly nine times higher in the 10% most-deprived areas than in the 10% least deprived areas in 2015/16.

 Lucie Giles, lead author of the report, said: "It is worrying that as a nation we buy enough alcohol for every person in Scotland to exceed the weekly drinking guideline substantially. This has harmful consequences for individuals, their family and friends as well as wider society and the economy. The harm that alcohol causes to our health is not distributed equally; the harmful effects are felt most by those living in the most disadvantaged areas in Scotland."

In 2016, the equivalent of 10.5 litres of pure alcohol were sold per adult in Scotland, representing 20.2 units per adult per week. Official guidelines advise against men and women drinking more than 14 units a week on a regular basis. Enough alcohol was sold last year in Scotland for every adult to exceed the weekly guideline by 44% every week of the year. Sales of alcohol per adult per week were 17% greater in Scotland than in England and Wales 

Alcohol Focus Scotland chief executive Alison Douglas, said: "Alcohol is so cheap and widely available that it's easy to forget how it can damage our health."

And it is also easy to overlook the fact the tremendous power of commercial advertising and retail pressure that exists to expand the market for the manufacturers and distributors. Booze means profits. 

All we want is the whole wide world

'Our Demands Most Moderate Are, We Only Want the Earth’

Wage-workers in industrial and developing countries, skilled and unskilled labourers, manual and mental workers, urban and rural workers, all are ravaged by this global scourge with lost jobs and low pay, wage freeze and wage cuts, downsized and diminished benefits, factory closures and run-away shops, and casualisation of labour, strike-breaking and union-busting. he prophets of Globalization talk of “free markets” and “free trade”. But how about freeing labour from wage-slavery?  The gap between the rich and the poor is wider and deeper than ever in history. Despite all the advances in social production through new technology, billions today still have no food on their tables or roofs over their heads. The last 100 years of capitalism has been a century of over-abundance for the owners of capital and utter deprivation for those who live only by the sale of their labour. Globalisation has inaugurated not a post-scarcity society but the unadorned class rule of the international capitalism and its insatiable pursuit of profit.

The Socialist Party is not prepared to collaborate with any political party which supports the capitalist system. The Socialist Party soley wants to see the end of capitalism, a system which has caused unemployment, zero-hours contracts (better known as modern slavery), homelessness, cuts and privatisation of our health and social care systems, education and pensions resulting for the first time since the 1930s food banks established throughout the entire nation. Today’s world is wracked by wars, racism, xenophobia and the rise yet again of organisations and political parties who preach fascistic doctrines. These facts alone demonstrate that capitalism has no place in the twenty-first century. The Socialist Party wants to see a world free from war, free from want and free from oppression. We want a world which promotes and protects the environment and the earth’s resources, not just for human beings but for all other forms of life. The Socialist Party wants to see a world at peace with liberty, justice and prosperity for all, above all we want a Socialist world. We want to see the dreams and aspirations of all those who fought for rights and freedoms become reality; a world where there are no leaders. We want to secure for the people a full return of all the wealth generated by our industries and services on the basis of common ownership of the means of production and distribution. Socialism means that production is based on human need and is not designed to satisfy the greed of the few. The capitalist market should not dictate what is produced but the majority of people should be able to debate and plan what is needed for society as a whole. The road to socialism requires a clear vision. The Socialist Party has no desire to add itself to the number of people's leaders. We are not back slapping or head patting when we say that young people of Britain and the world are the hope of the future. Without their present and future labour power, capitalism has no future. We seek understanding and cooperation in the biggest of all projects, not to fight for the abolition of this or that, or the amelioration of that or the other, but for a complete revolution in our social system. Capitalism took the idealism of our fathers and their fathers and covered it with the muck of two great wars. It took their young bodies and shattered them for its narrow interests. It continues to poison the Earth with pollution: it continues to cloud your vision with nationalist falsehoods wrapped up in sentiment and cheap patriotism. It will, if necessary, throw you in conflict against our brothers and sisters of other lands.

These demands are not excessive; they are most moderate. We only want the earth! It is humanity’s choice.

Jacque Fresco, Futurist Who Envisioned a Society Without Money, Dies at 101

Jacque Fresco, a self-taught and passionate industrial designer who envisioned an alternative society where money would be eliminated and resources distributed equitably by computers, died on May 18 in Sebring, Fla. He was 101.

His death was confirmed by Roxanne Meadows, his partner, who said he had Parkinson’s syndrome and had recently broken a hip.

Mr. Fresco created the Venus Project on 21 rural acres that he and Ms. Meadows acquired in south-central Florida in 1980 to pursue his quixotic plan: creating a resource-based economy that would rescue modern society from the ills of failed political systems.

About two hours south of Orlando, he and Ms. Meadows constructed domed buildings and other structures to showcase his ideas for energy-efficient cities that would be built in circular arrangements. They supported the project with $200 tours of the compound and by selling books and videos.

“I would like to see an end to war, poverty and unnecessary human suffering,” he said in an interview on his website. “But I can’t see it in a monetary-based system where the richest nations control most of the world’s resources. I cannot see that happening. I see a constant repeat of the same series of events: war, poverty, recession, boom, bust and war again.”

He wanted all sovereign nations to declare the world’s resources — clean air and water, arable land, education, health care, energy and food — the “common heritage” of all people. In his so-called resource-based economy, he said, people would get what they want through computers. He looked upon his plan as a practical, even inevitable response to the inequities rampant in the modern world. But he conceded that only a catastrophe would lead to the adoption of his concept.

“Economic collapse,” he said, would demonstrate to people that elected politicians “aren’t competent enough to get us out of these problems, and they will look to possible solutions.”

Unfortunately capitalism is an extremely resilient social system and economic collapse in some sectors provide opportunities in others even unto war. He was quite correct though that capitalism itself was incapable of reform and required to be replaced with a production for use post-capitalist society, where access was free.

Robert Murphy, an associate scholar at the Mises Institute, which promotes the teaching of Austrian economics, wrote in 2010 that idealists like Mr. Fresco were “wrong to blame our current dysfunctional world on capitalism or money per se.” Instead, Mr. Murphy wrote, if property rights were respected by all, “humanity would become fantastically wealthy.”

Murphy and the Mises institute are more idealistic than Jacque Fresno could ever be and are quite incorrect. It is private, corporate and state ownership of property, specifically the means of producing and distributing wealth, which creates poverty, both relative and absolute, requiring an economically dependent working class (90-95%) to produce a vast array of commodities for sale for the profit of the economic parasite class (5-10%) in return for  a subsistence ration payment(wages).


Mr. Fresco, who believed fervently in science’s power to transform life for the better, said on Facebook: “We have the technology to build a global paradise on earth, and at the same time we have the power to end life as we know it. I am a futurist. I cannot predict the actual future — only what it can be if we manage the earth and its resources intelligently.”

Socialists can only agree.

Source New York Times

The Illogic of capitalism

It’s apparent to everyone today that the world is going through an environmental crisis. Climate change is already impacting our lives. As it gets worse, we will be affected by more floods, forest-fires and droughts. Climate change is a result of an economic system — capitalism — in which profit-making takes precedence over the real needs of communities and their surroundings regardless of what the science tells us we should do. Capitalism is an economic system profoundly and irrevocably at odds with a sustainable planet, as it requires ever-increasing amounts material and energy to keep expanding. Capitalism of necessity exploits the land and the people and sacrifices the interests of both on the altar of profit. The contradiction between the environment and lust for profits is one that capitalism will be unable to overcome. A socialist society would not be bounded by the illogic of capitalism and would pursue clean energy because profits wouldn't be on the line. Nature and society, however, need not be seen as always in opposition but could co-develop with one another.

Under capitalism, decisions on what and how to produce are made by corporate executives maximising profits by increasing sales and decreasing costs to the business. People and nature are exploited directly and indirectly as external costs are imposed on them. Controls on corporate excess, through regulation can limit abuse, but tend to be too little, too late. Changes in individual consumer behaviour and introduction to better technology can buy time but are insufficient to save the planet as long as “capitalism allows companies to continue polluting. The entire production system must be transformed; we must change the way society decides to allocate resources in the interdependent web of the world economy.  Securing an environmentally sustainable production system will require fundamental political and social change on every scale and in every sphere. Human and environmental needs can be brought into sustainable balance only if production takes account of all environmental consequences. A sustainable economy requires a system in which production is owned by all and democratically planned and controlled by well-informed people.

Today's consumer-orientated life-style campaigns are a distraction to the urgent action needed. The environment can be sustained by collective stewardship as our material needs are securely met by a fair distribution and sharing of resources. Leaving the process to the status quo of Big Business and their politicians is to guarantee mutually assured destruction. Humanity cannot afford to allow the narrow profit interests of a tiny super-rich elite to cost us the planet. The very future of the earth depends upon overthrowing the rule of profit and replacing it with socialism, which can utilise the world's resources for the common good. 

If humanity is to have any chance of re-entering a sustainable relationship with nature, we need to stop the rot at its source: capitalism and class society must be gotten rid of.   The current exploitative system must be replaced by one in which humans are not divorced from nature, but become the conscious aspect of nature.  Doing that requires a revolution: we must get rid not only of the exploitation of nature, but also the exploitation of one human being by another. In order to prevent a future ecological nightmare and preserve our planet for generations to come; a sustainable society in which the working class empowers itself—a socialist society—is vitally necessary. Capitalism’s insatiable reliance on ever-expanding profits cannot be sustained on our finite planet. Capitalism engages in production to produce profit. This is the primary motive and the satisfaction of human needs is secondary to this. Because of the internal workings of the system there is a need for continual growth. Capitalism must grow or die. Our rulers are not in control of the system, they only respond to its demand for cheap raw materials and any means of keeping monetary costs down and profits up. This is the real reason why years of climate conferences have failed to halt the destruction of the planet. Our rulers measure their success by economic growth rates. The only way to halt the trashing of our planet is to end the capitalist system of production. The entire system of capitalist production needs to be ended before we can have any hope of reversing the dreadful damage capitalism has inflicted on the planet. The production for profit, and the system of wage labour which supports it, need to be replaced with social production. The productive forces need to become common property for the satisfaction of human needs.  All attempts to reform capitalism and make our rulers see the error of their ways are a waste of effort. The choice today is engaging in the struggle for a socialist planet or seeing the ruin of civilisation.

 The watchword for such a society will be:

“From each according to their ability to each according to their needs.”

A new society for a new world

We are living in one of the most volatile periods in history.  There is the looming possibility of environmental catastrophe.

The environmental crisis is not the fault of the working class. The only thing the workers are “guilty” of is not as yet overthrowing the capitalism system. Under the profit system, the majority does not have a say in how resources are used or production is organized. The capitalists are behind these decisions, and their main decision-making criteria is the pursuit of profit. Under capitalism, businesses must compete with one another and maximize profits in order to survive. The individual efforts of consumers cannot defeat the powerful structural incentives that drive environmental destruction. The structure itself must be fundamentally transformed. Capitalism is not something that can be reformed. Some in the environmentalist movement, however, seek in effect to pass the burden onto the shoulders of the working class. The workers are asked to sacrifice their standard of living in an effort to stave off environmental disaster, while the capitalists can continue to fill their coffers with profits. It is true that workers have both the power and the responsibility to ameliorate the effects of climate change. But this cannot require punishing people for wanting a good quality of life. The working class has the power to ensure that the planet is habitable for everyone precisely because it has the power to defeat capitalism. The environment is an interconnected system of which we are a part, in which humanity participates and manipulates with our technology. Humans must interact with nature. However, the interaction between humans and nature – production of food, extraction of raw material, waste disposal, pollution, etc. – can be better managed to allow mutual prosperity. It is only in the epoch of capitalism, that our tools have become so powerful that they threaten to destroy the system on which everything, including ourselves, depends. However, we are not fated to be doomed. Humans are rational beings. We are able to adapt. Technological innovation has already provided the possibility of re-tooling our economy and our societies with clean, renewable energy from the sun, wind, and water. There is no need for new breakthroughs to achieve this even though further breakthroughs still arise. By shifting towards a cleaner and more sustainable approach, this is entirely possible. For example, quality food production does not inherently require stripping the soil of nutrients and then clear-cutting rainforests to find more fertile soil. No new technology or ideas are required to grow enough food to feed humanity while preserving the soil (and the rainforests) for future generations. We already know how to do that. 

The problem is that the capitalist economy is not subject to our intelligence or reason.  It is subject to the anarchy of the market and not consciously planned to be in harmony with the environment. Under capitalism, we allow the vast bulk of the economy to be run undemocratically by a tiny minority.  The only thing standing in the way is Big Business and the elite who make the decisions about what is produced and how it is produced based on the prerequisite of increasing profits for the owners of corporations and their investors.  The incessant quest for profits at the expense of climate stability and human well-being and life, serves only those who collect the profits: the super-wealthy. Unsurprisingly, the capitalists run things in a way that serves the interests of their own class. In the capitalists’ eyes, the earth is there to be plundered and exploited.  Under capitalism, no value is placed on nature or human life. Production, therefore, is driven by short-term profit interests – and powered by “cheap,” polluting carbon-based energy – with no consideration of the damage inflicted on the environment and human lives. 

What is needed is the next step in social evolution. We need an economic and political system that will not attack, but rather, will improve our standard of living in a way that is not detrimental to the environment. No longer would we need to rely on technology that pollutes our water, air, and land because “the market” deems it the cheapest. A socialist economy would be run by all layers of society, democratically, from the bottom up.  The producers in every enterprise would link up with entire workplaces, industries, states, countries, and eventually the whole world. This would be a new, truly democratic political system embedded in the very structure of the economy. Everyone would have the opportunity to put forward their ideas and opinions. When workers have the ability to be creative in the workplace they would innovate to make things safer, more efficient, and environmentally sustainable. There would be little interest in planning an economy that would create pollution or rely on hazardous materials that kill and maim workers. We could put our best and brightest minds to use, not in developing earth-destroying technologies for the benefit of the minority. Under capitalism, these are merely “externalities.” But if subject to a democratic discussion, we are confident they would be quickly eradicated. By ridding ourselves of the profit motive and private ownership of the means of production, humans can reconnect with the earth and their own labour, thereby fully connecting with each other and their natural surroundings. Instead of the world being to benefit huge multinationals, it would be organised to apply the resources and skills of workers to improve the conditions of people around the world. We could the attain the worldwide cooperation necessary to deal with problems like global warming, and begin to reverse the environmental catastrophe. Only by overthrowing the capitalist system and replacing it with one where production is democratically and collectively owned controlled by the community will climate change be stopped and our future secured. 

For the future of humanity and for the panet, we need socialism.