The Sanity of Socialism

We are aware of the fact that the majority of the people oppose so­cialism, but we are equally aware that the majority is not acquainted, for the most part, with what the socialist case is all about. And one of the obstacles has always been the alleged urgency of things that seem to be of greater priority. There is always a crisis. These crises, such as war, un­employment, oppression of particular groups or other social grievances are always held to be more important. It is difficult for socialists not to feel irritated at times because the urgency is exactly the clue to the lack of comprehension of what the problem is about.

The latest crisis is the environment. In the last few years, a movement has come on the scene to save the environment. The environment has become the great discovery of the past decade. It is being treated as if it were a territorial discovery and has been made into a new area of activity with departments set up in most com­munities and states to supervise ecological activities. The word ‘ecology’ has become a household term. Business enterprises have been formed to make a profit in this new arena. The end of the world is at hand unless we do something about the environment!

The socialist feels that long before fighting pollution became a popular cause and the word ‘ecology’ a fashionable term, capitalism was indicted on this specific charge, along with many others. We maintained that as long as we had the relationships of a market economy, that is, the pro­duction of commodities to be sold for a profit — the environment be damned, profits come first.

Factories along the banks of rivers pouring their poisonous effluents into the water year in and year out — this was normalcy. Factories with their smokestacks belching noxious, toxic fumes into the atmosphere — this was business as usual. These are still typical symptoms of what is called prosperity — people are working, getting wages, everything is ‘normal.’

But what do the environmentalists advocate? They deal with all the visible effects but continue to be blithely unaware of root causes. Sure, they can slap a fine on a factory that pollutes — they can chastise a public utility that blackens the sky. But what motivates business is not the same concern that our ecologist friends have.

The conflict of interests comes up constantly. When the Sierra Club, a group of environmentalists, was confronted with the fact that its funds were invested in companies that are among the prime polluters, its re­sponse was that they had to be practical.

Of course, on the other hand, the prime concern of business is to keep the costs of production as low as possible. Profits have to be of paramount priority.

We are convinced, based on the facts available to anyone, that in our enlightened, technological age, almost all our problems can be solved. A planet fit for human beings to inhabit has become the question of ultimate survival.

Our case boils down to this simple premise: Let us eliminate the rela­tionships of commodity production — let us produce goods to serve the needs of humanity instead of producing in order to make profits — let us organize our world on a democratically planned base instead of working for the benefit of the stockholders — let us harness the natural wealth of the universe and match it with the trained technology of the workers who live on this planet.

All of the solutions of these problems would then fall into place. Thus, we are now able to eliminate waste. The waste of war. The waste of dupli­cation on the part of many competing companies. The waste of countless unnecessary industries such as banking, insurance, and advertising.

We contend that potentially the problem of production has already been solved. We can produce enough food and in infinite abundance. We can build as many homes as may be needed. We can fabricate endless miles of clothing and in infinite variety. And ALL WITHOUT POLLUTION.

And now we come to the question: ‘Is there enough?’ We are told that the mineral resources are running out. Consumption is running ahead of production. On this score, socialists are not interested in a system of production and distribution that ignores the basic purpose of satisfying social and human needs in favor of profits.

Any science, in any field of production which does not take into ac­count its social background and human purpose, is no science but merely technology.

The benefits of science and technology have yet to reach the multi­tudes. They have arrived only for a few people who own and control their operations.

Much scientific information available in many books on a variety of subjects concerning the natural and mineral resources of the world con­cludes that there is no shortage. No shortage of oil, coal or agricultural land; no shortage of any form of natural wealth, including energy.

Capitalism, which is based on a market economy, has been known to create shortages in order to boost prices. In order to attempt to affect prices, capitalism will curtail production, oft times squandering natural resources.

Many resources are considered in short (sometimes dangerously low) supply due only to the fact that they cannot be brought to the market profitably.

Every assessment of wealth is judged in this way. It would not be judged in this way in a socialist society.

The resource that commands the most attention at the present time is energy. Right now fossil fuel, mostly in the form of petroleum, is the dominant source of energy. Mainly because in the recent past few genera­tions it has been relatively available on the basis of supply as well as cost.

And under the ground lies a huge reservoir of coal and shale, largely untapped due to the uneconomic mining and processing involved. However, petroleum is getting more and more expensive due to real or imaginary shortages or political jockeying by the oil-producing countries versus the major multinational oil companies. And everyone and his brother and cousin is searching for alternative sources of the stuff that will run his automobile or heat his furnace at home.

This can be a fun game: An example of another source of clean, non-­polluting energy is geothermal. In the permeable rocks beneath the earth’s surface, water is heated by molten magma creating steam. You have often seen pictures of the geyser ‘Old Faithful’ spouting a jet of steam with age-old regularity. This steam can be harnessed. It can be brought to the earth’s surface through bore holes and used to drive generators producing electricity. Once the steam has cooled and condensed it can be returned via other bore holes back to the permeable layer where it is again heated, returning to steam — and so the process continues in constant recycling.

Perfectly practical? Too good to be true? What’s the hitch? It sounds too much like sanity.

There is a theory that comes up over and over again. It states that population, if not checked, would always increase faster than the available food supply. And further, this Malthusian theory argues that the way na­ture checks this imbalance is through war, poverty, and pestilence.

Some people fall for this and conclude that famine is, in a way, a good thing. It keeps the growth of population in check.

Actually, the theory is false. It assumes a premise that does not hold true. Overpopulation does not breed poverty but rather poverty breeds overpopulation. Hunger is usually not caused by the insufficient production of food in the world but by social factors that prevent the required distribution of food. The issue is clear. Improvisation within the limits of the capitalist mode of production cannot solve the problem of over-population. Only the sanity of socialism can offer the answer to this fearful problem. The fact is that today, not in the future, mankind has reached a potential super-abundance of all of the requirements to sustain life. Famine in 2017 is inexcusable.

Technologically, modern agriculture in the United States alone could produce enough food to feed the entire world. The application of science to soil — even soil-less agriculture — gives the lie to the Malthusian premise about food supply. And just around the corner stands the prospect of desalinization of sea water on a greater than the experimental basis. We literally will be able to irrigate the deserts of the earth and produce food anywhere.

We may say of the food problem, as we have said of the energy problem: We are not facing some final exhaustion of the world’s sources of food. The economist who sees capitalism as the best of all possible worlds says that we are simply short of capital. Any worldwide solution to the food problem will require the massive investment of resources. We, socialists, say the solution is obvious: Produce only to satisfy human needs and wants.

What will happen to the environment when working men and women decide to establish socialism? We cannot give a detailed account, but cer­tain things are clear. Instead of society being hell-bent on profit, the prime motivation is providing the population with food, clothing, and shelter (with a big plus) at a level that makes sense in every sense:

Energy — that which is the most efficient and environmentally satisfy­ing at the same time.

Transportation — no competing brands of vehicles; only the best will do. Probably more public transportation, but with a view to comfort and convenience.

Manufacturing — any process that despoils nature and endangers man obviously will be discontinued. The inventiveness of our age will overcome any short-range difficulties.

It may sound strange, but really what we are advocating is sanity. We call it socialism.

Abridged and adapted from here

http://www.wspus.org/2016/06/a-tv-program-the-sanity-of-socialism/

From Glasgow's rich history

Party News from the July 1950 issue of the Socialist Standard

Kelvingrove Branch is now 15 strong having recently recruited three new members. The discussion group started in November of last year, is still running with a satisfactory attendance. Outdoor propaganda meetings were started about the middle of April, but up to now, they have not been a great success owing to lack of experienced speakers among the branch members. But the meetings are a useful training ground and young speakers are gaining the necessary experience with each meeting held. Next year should find the branch with an established propaganda station, qualified speakers and good audiences. One meeting held this year, on the first Sunday in June at Drury Street was a fair success, a young member of the branch holding an audience of 200 workers for nearly two hours.

Kelvingrove members have recently finished the first month of a door-to-door literature sales drive and they have sold a considerable number of Party pamphlets. During May the Glasgow members completely sold out their stock of the current issue of the Socialist Standard and during June and July, they anticipated increased sales of our paper. Comrades Turner and Millen visited Glasgow during May, Turner speaking at the May Day rally and Millen addressing the branch's first indoor propaganda venture on the subject, “Your Vote—Did it Matter?" The Kelvingrove members are pleased with the response.

Something Could Go Wrong

We are all aware of the rapidly increasing tension between the US and North Korea, the latest development being the Koreans threat that they may test a Hydrogen bomb in the Pacific Ocean. This would mean a nuclear-armed missile flying over Japan. 

It must surely occur to many that something could go wrong and it might actually land on Japan.

 For many years the world was haunted by the fear of a nuclear war which was gradually replaced by the threat of global warming, now the old threat has returned. 

This shows how nothing has changed under capitalism, which is a good reason to abolish it.

For socialism, 

Steve, Mehmet, John & all contributing members of the SPC.

One Real Democracy

Speaking of Ms.Freeland - on Sept.22 she informed the government of Venezuela that Canada has imposed sanctions against 40 members of the regime of President Nicolas Maduro, including himself. Since taking office in 2013, Maduro has ruled by decree and ignored the elected national assembly. These individuals are, to quote Ms.Freeland, ''Helping to undermine the security, stability, and integrity of democratic institutions in Venezuela.''

Many capitalists would like to abolish democratic institutions so they can do exactly as they wish and many who defend political democracy do so to conn the working class into thinking by electing the upholders of capitalism to office they are the ones who rule.

 In the final analysis, there is only one real democracy and its called Socialism.

For socialism, 

Steve, Mehmet, John & all contributing members of the SPC.

Freedom from Capitalism

 People are looking for an alternative to austerity and assumptions that “common sense” which “everyone knows” works such as lower taxes and privatisation are being increasingly discarded. The society in which we live makes it almost impossible for most of us to be healthy, happy, or wise, no matter how hard we try. How can we become more healthy when the environment in which we live is profoundly unhealthy? How nice a person can you afford to be in a world that is not nice, where competition and aggression are highly valued attributes? And how can people become wise when they are constantly being fed misinformation, distortions of the truth and downright lies fro Wealth, over-abundance, misery and suffering side by side! When will our fellow- workers see this glaring contradiction and recognise the remedy as the dispossession of the owners of the means of living, and the establishment of socialism?

The capitalist buys labour power at its value, yet robs the worker. The value of labour power depends upon the cost of production of the labourer, and the cost of production of the labourer depends upon his cost of living. Inside this, however, is the fact that standards of living for different types of workers vary, and standards also vary between one country and another. The capitalist aims at lowering the general standard of living to the lowest possible level.

The labourer, when working, produces a greater value than the value of his means of living, and the capitalist takes the extra value produced. Our correspondent argues that this is exploitation, but not robbery because the capitalist pays the labourer the value of his labour-power. In his eyes, only that which is illegal to-day is robbery. But although the capitalist pays the labourer the value of his labour-power, he does not pay him the value of his product.

We will leave aside the question of depressing the standard of living, wherein the capitalist obviously robs the worker of former advantages. It is to be assumed that the critic does not suggest the worker willingly agrees to wage reductions, etc. As the worker is deprived of wealth that he does not willingly give, he is plundered by force.

The workers fight for a larger amount of the total wealth produced but are defeated in the long run by the power of the capitalists. The capitalist shows his power by the giving and withholding of jobs, which signifies inviting the workers to produce on certain terms or starve. Dick Turpin used a pistol to force wealth from his victims; the capitalist uses the threat of starvation for the same purpose. The one method is illegal robbery; the other is legal robbery. In the present discussion the main difference between the two is the question of legality. There is another difference. Dick Turpin did the job himself; the capitalist pays others to do it. When Dick Turpin met with opposition he had only his own arms to call upon. When the worker resists the capitalist, the latter can call upon the State power to bring the worker to subjection and force him to produce.

The difficulty is that the mass of the workers do not realise that they are being robbed.

The original accumulation of the capitalists, by means of which they were able to obtain control of the means of production and subject the worker to exploitation, was also robbery. The plundering of the Eastern and Western countries, the plundering of the monasteries and the enclosing of lands by driving the original owners off, form the principal part of the capitalists’ early accumulation of wealth.

The capitalist deprives, plunders and strips the worker of energy, leisure, pleasure, the product of his labour, and a host of other things, and it is done by force, and secretly or clandestinely by gradual and imperceptible means. Therefore the capitalist robs the worker. The customs of savage society do not permit this form of robbery, but the laws of capitalist society do. Therefore it is now legal robbery.

It is true the capitalists rob and cheat each other, but the robbery of the worker is the basis of the system.

Irrespective of who gets in or the size of their vote, life for the working class will remain the same. Our poverty, our unemployment. our slums and mean living will still be with us for these are the constant realities of capitalism, however, we may perceive it. One of the most exciting prospects of socialism is that for the first time since the beginning of property society we shall regain control of our time, of our lives. If our fellow- workers would only understand that present social system runs for the benefit of our masters, and leaves us who do the work every day in more abject poverty. We could so easily be free from the anxiety of insecurity, free from the blight of never-ending toil.

SNP - Fake Promises

Scotland’s finance secretary has dampened hopes of a substantial pay rise for public sector workers, claiming he needed more money from the UK government. His remarks irritated Scottish trade union leaders, who believe Mackay is shifting the blame for a poor pay deal on to the UK government because Scottish ministers are unable to afford all their election promises.

Derek Mackay said his ability to offer Scottish nurses, police, teachers and civil servants the proper wage increase he had promised depended on whether Philip Hammond, the chancellor, increased public spending in the next UK budget.

Nicola Sturgeon’s government has repeatedly promised to end the 1% public sector pay cap, particularly after she endured difficult exchanges with nurses and teachers who complained about their financial problems during the general election campaign. The Scottish TUC issued a statement warning Mackay it expected both governments to honour their pay promises.  Trade union leaders are pressing for an above inflation pay rise. They suspect Sturgeon and Mackay are shying away from using Scotland’s new income tax powers to fund higher pay, but the STUC said it ought to use those powers regardless of the UK government’s decision.

“The Scottish government has responsibility for 90% of public workers. Half a million workers are depending on the SNP government taking action now for a fair pay deal... Public workers won’t wait for Westminster.”” the STUC said.

Class Struggle Reality

The class struggle arises in the economic field, but that the workers can only be victorious in that struggle by becoming conscious of their class interests and controlling political power. The objection is often raised that the workers are "robbed” in the process of production and that it is on the industrial field that we must fight for emancipation. These objectors do not realise that economic systems are controlled politically and that material conditions give rise to political institutions by means of which ruling classes dominate the economic world. The materialist view of history shows that the material conditions of production, etc., make necessary political machinery to govern or control the economic life of society. Every class struggling for control of the economic basis of society has to become politically supreme in order to maintain or obtain economic possession.  On the political field, the class struggle can be explained and driven home far more effectively than in the factories and offices, where the sectional rivalry between workers obscures the class line.  Practically all political activists who talk about socialism gained their ideas about the nature of socialism outside the work-place and inside political agitation.

We are often told that "economic power” is the key to the situation. The working class, however, have no economic power. The working class cannot live except by being employed by the masters. The instruments of production, as well as the products, belong to the employers, which leaves the workers in the position of constantly struggling for a job and wages in order to exist. It has been claimed that because the workers are necessary to production, their "indispensability" is an economic power. But the workers can’t live on their quality of being necessary to industry. And as soon as they enter into production, they do so on the employers’ terms. If “economic power” depends upon possession, as in the employers’ case, then it at once rules the workers out from “economic power. ” The employing class have to "back up” their economic possession by controlling the political machine.

The age-long efforts to prevent the workers having a vote, and the huge funds and resources used to maintain a capitalist majority, show how important a machine Parliament is for the ruling class. It is the seat of power. It is the main machine of the modern State, through which the armed forces are controlled. Before the workers can do anything with the State machinery, they first of all must win possession of it.  If that Parliamentary control is left in the hands of our enemies, the workers are without any means of taking possession of the machinery of wealth production, etc.

Our life in capitalism becomes more and more fragmented, more and more specialised. Capitalism is a system of society which divides people rather than unites them — capitalist from a worker, men from women, blacks from whites, nation from nation. It teaches us competition not co-operation competition for jobs, housing and something that approximates to a bearable standard of living. The division between capitalist and worker is inherent in capitalism — their interests are totally opposed and can never be reconciled. But the divisions between workers are not inherent —they are encouraged by the conditions in which we live and work but could be overcome through a recognition of our common class interests, our mutual inter-dependence and, above all, the need for radical change. The Socialist Party is striving for the real emancipation of humanity.

It's A Barbie Nonsense

One might think the gents elected to office in Ottawa would be above thinking in sexist terms, well think again pally 'cos some of 'em are really goofy.

 Gerry Ritz, Tory MP for Lloydminster really put it on,(sorry folks couldn't resist it, but please keep reading I won't do it again), called Catherine McKenna, minister for environment and climate change ,''a climate Barbie''. 

Nor did his leader Andrew Scheer criticize him. Foreign Affairs minister Chrystia Freedland was laughed at for wearing a red dress and dismissed for her charm. The incoming governor general, Julie Payette, an engineer and astronaut was hounded over the details of her divorce and for having been found faultless in a traffic accident.

It makes one wonder when these clowns will ever wake up and realize that as far as brains, talent and inclination are concerned there are no differences between the sexes, but differences between people. I guess it will take a socialist society to make 'em see the light.

For socialism, 

Steve, Mehmet, John & all contributing members of the SPC

Against Reformism

The Socialist Party holds to a vision of world solidarity where men and women are in control of their own destinies. In socialism there will be no social organ of coercion — in short, no state, not even a so-called "workers' state" — and so no police, no armed forces, no courts, no prisons, no machinery to coerce people to do what they might not want to do.

Socialism will be a state-free society in which people will co-operate, on the basis of common ownership and democratic control. to produce what they need as individuals and as communities. This co-operation will be entirely voluntary and so will have to be undertaken because people want to because they realise that it is necessary and in their best self-interest. In other words, because they have a socialist understanding.

Clearly, since such a society can only function with the voluntary co-operation and conscious participation of its members, it can only be established by people who want it and who understand all its implications. By definition, socialism cannot be established by a minority. It is just absurd — a contradiction in terms — to suggest that some minority could force the majority to co-operate voluntarily. The main features of socialism are world community, common ownership, democratic control, production for use, free access. Socialism is an immediate possibility. All the conditions for its establishment are present except one — precisely the majority socialist understanding we have been discussing. In other words, as soon as this last condition is met. as soon as a majority of wage and salary earners want and understand socialism, it can be established immediately, without any so-called "transition period".

Fellow workers, the only remedy for your precarious and poverty-stricken condition is to be found in the recognition of your class position. You must recognise that you are mere cogs in the industrial machine, that you are permitted to work only so long as there is profit to be derived from your labour. You must understand what you want and how to get it; then there will be no room for labour "leaders." You would not need to be led. and you could not be misled. You must organise then inside the Socialist Party, and work consciously for that revolution which will replace poverty and misery for those who do the world's work with plenty for all.

The Socialist Party shows that the road to socialism does not lie through “palliatives,” and that even where each measure may affect a slight improvement in the lot of any workers, they are by their nature simply patches on a rotten fabric, and consequently in no way installments of the new society. In short, nearly all so-called palliatives do not ameliorate; and even where they may do so, the economic development of capitalism progressively produces ill effects that ever outstrip every palliative effort, and make the need for Socialism more imperative.

Further, even were the work of the Socialist Party simply an attempt to cause the enactment of reform measures that would appreciably benefit the whole working class, it would first be necessary for the Party to conquer the power of the State. Thus even for reform worth the name, a revolution would be necessary, whereas socialism could be had at the same price. Moreover, the workers could be more easily united as a whole for socialism than for a programme of sectional, mutually conflicting, pettifogging reforms.

These are some of the reasons, together with the important fact that the economic trend makes socialism the only practical proposition, that makes it impossible for The Socialist Party to put forward a reform programme.

The task of the working-class party is the conquest of the governmental machinery and forces, for socialist ends. Consequently, support is only useful to the party on that understanding. To pander to the reform mania would attract non-socialists and weaken the party, while the absence of positive or useful result would spread disgust and apathy.

A reform programme is, in fact, fraudulent, particularly from the socialist standpoint. Therefore, while willing to secure any amelioration or help possible for the workers in their fight against capital the Socialist Party realises that socialism transcends all else, and stands distinct from all other parties on a programme of Socialism and nothing but socialism. No palliation could be effective enough, in view of the necessary conditions of the development of capitalism, to put back the hour of emancipation to any appreciable extent. It could only demonstrate once more the helplessness of anything short of socialism. What does put back the hour of emancipation is the false hope in reform assiduously fostered by astute capitalists and ignorant or corrupt Labour politicians. The sooner the working class learn the lesson of the working-class movement the quicker shall we have started on the road to our emancipation. That lesson, surely, is that the position of our representatives in Parliament must be one of absolute independence from any pro-capitalist party, and that such independence most be based upon their hostility to capitalist parties.

The working class, having learnt that capitalist exploitation is the source of their social evils and their enslavement, will seek to emancipate themselves and solve their social problems by the abolition of capitalism through the establishment of socialism. Parliamentary action must always be guided by that object, and no compromise with the enemy is possible or desirable. The essential factor is the education of the workers in the principles of socialism, for on the “rank and file” rests the responsibility of a “leader’s" shortcomings. The failure of the Labour Party to “make good" is useful in showing how it can not be done, but is a useless waste of time to those of us who knew it could not be done that way.

Pie In The Sky

 In The Guardian's 27 September 2017 article, Jeremy Corbyn: neoliberalism is broken and we are now the centre ground, informs us that Corbyn's tax reform platform in the UK is high sounding better news for many workers in Britain as well as the rest of the planet. Rent controls, taxing developer's unused land, 'ending austerity, abolishing tuition fees, and scraping the public sector pay cap' – all music to some workers' ears. But what about this blind alley of reforming old capitalism? 

To good to be true? The globe is a big place, and no one has to look far to learn how capitalists easily move capital country to country, seeking higher and higher returns on capital; the exploitation of the great unwashed and washed alike, endlessly tossing up more human miseries, social degradation, pollution, social strife and inequalities . . . These are ubiquitous features of capitalism functioning in its usual disgustingly healthy way. 

We wish Corbyn and his company of reformists well, who wouldn't, but as long as capitalism is around it is 'pie in the sky' hoping it will ever run in the interests of workers. The point is to dump capitalism altogether.

For socialism, 

Steve, Mehmet, John & all contributing members of the SPC.

Not A Pretty Picture.

Our good friends at the Toronto Star ran an article in their Sept.9 edition which focused on the "benefits" of working for temp. employment agencies, most of which was an exposure of Toronto's Fiera Foods bakery. It made clear that for many of the working class wages and working conditions haven't improved much since the industrial revolution, especially since Fiera aren't the only ferocious exploiters around. 

Since the article is two and a half pages long I would recommend, dear reader, to check it out, on page one, the star.com. There is though one aspect I want to draw your attention to, that of the problems of compensation for injuries on the job. The company doesn't pay up because they say the worker is employed by the agency. Over the last ten years, the injury rate for temps who work with machinery has been double the rate of permanent workers who do. Though exact figures are not available, many temps who are injured do not make claims for fear of losing their jobs. There it is folks, not a pretty picture, but please read the Stars expose.

George owns a coffee stall at the mall across the street from my building. He told me he had worked for ten years in kitchens for low pay, no benefits or holidays. Whenever he asked a boss if he could have a two week holiday the answer was all the same and needs no translation,"Sure you can but I cant promise you'll have a job to come back too". So George never took one. Wanting to be his own boss George opened the coffee stall. Now he works twelve hours a day, six days a week and doesn't take a holiday because he needs the sales to make the business pay. 

That's life under capitalism for most of us, every which way your screwed

For socialism, 

Steve, Mehmet, John & all contributing members of the SPC.

The No Solution Remedy

Gods buddy, Justin Welby, a.k.a. the Archbishop of Canterbury was reported in the London Sun, September 6, as pretty p.o.d about the wage inequality in U.K. Mostly the dear old Bish mouthed off really fierce at the heads of the Financial Times Stock Exchange paying themselves more than 150 times their average employees wage.

Bishy, previously an oil exec. said,''Between 2010 and 2015, when many workers were seeing their pay fall in real terms, the median pay for directors in FTSE 100 companies rose 47 per cent. The seemingly runaway nature of high pay among the richest and most powerful bears little relation to the experience of the majority of people".

Boy! does this guy catch on fast. And just how does Mr. Bishy suggest we fix the problem? To sum up his long and garbled discourse briefly its simply tax the crap out of the rich dudes. Therefore the government which, let's face it, is the executive committee of the capitalist class would have more loot in its pathetic attempt to administrate a chaotic system, like B.F.D. Exploitation, war, poverty, unemployment and all the other niceties of capitalism would continue no matter how much the parasites are taxed. Nor would their political stooges do what he wants, if anyone did anything in this matter Mr. Welby should be doing stand up comedy. The old Bish would be better advised advocating a world where wages wouldn't exist.

Steve, Mehmet, John & all contributing members of the SPC.

Film Review Watch The Trailer

From World Socialist Party New Zealand, Moggie Grayson gives us his review of the movie, The Young Karl Marx -

Hello Comrades,

At this year's Film Festival in Wellington I went along to see "The Young Karl Marx". If you haven't seen it yet, I can thoroughly recommend it. It deals with Marx and Engels from their first meeting through to when they published The Communist Manifesto. It was mostly filmed in Europe and the dialogue is mostly in French and German. A few people commented that they had difficulty reading the sub-titles at the bottom of the screen, so I wouldn't recommend trying to watch it on a small T.V. screen, unless you can get a DVD that has been dubbed into English. If you get the chance to go and see it at a cinema I'm sure you will find it absorbing. I was hoping to find a review of it in The Standard, but maybe it hasn't made the Film Festivals in your neck-of-the-woods yet. You can find reviews of it on the internet.

Trailer: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dz-1BLjQlHo

Yours for Socialism,

MOGGIE

WSP NZ - Save the planet - its the only one with chocolate!

Wha's Like Us????

Victim Support Scotland said 5708 charges were made relating to hate crime in Scotland in 2016-17.

Among them were 3349 racial, 673 religious, 1075 LGB, 40 transgender and 188 disability hate crimes.

Victim Support Scotland are also calling for the recognition of hate crimes against the homeless, elderly, asylum seekers and refugees, gypsies and travellers.

The charity who aid victims believe many more go unreported. Now they are calling for action to help those people suffering bigoted abuse in silence

Now they are calling for action to help those people suffering bigoted abuse in silence.

Who Owns Scotland?

A study into who owns Scotland's land and the impact that has on the people who live there is to be carried out by the new Scottish Land Commission(SLC).

It has been estimated that fewer than 500 people own half of all privately-owned land in Scotland.

That is one of the highest concentrations of land ownership in Europe.

SLC chief executive Hamish Trench said: "Scotland does have an unusually concentrated land ownership pattern."

There is no definitive list of who owns what in Scotland and that inevitably leads to questions about transparency. Malcolm Combe, a specialist in land law at the University of Aberdeen, said: "At the moment Scotland has a wholly unregulated land market, which means to say it doesn't really matter where you're from or where your company is based.

"Some people say that is absolutely fine and that allows for inward investment and this kind of thing. But there are some issues in terms of transparency and accountability."

Analysis by land reform campaigner and now Green MSP Andy Wightman has estimated that half of the privately-owned land is in the hands of 432 people.

Community Land Scotland policy director Peter Peacock said: "Scotland has got very, very unusual land ownership patterns with very few people owning vast amounts of land. That has big societal implications. It concentrates power in a few people's hands and it concentrates wealth."

Not well in Scotland

The 2016 Scottish Health Survey shows that 35 per cent of those living in the most deprived areas smoke cigarettes. This is three times higher than those living in the least deprived areas (11 per cent).

Researchers also found differences in levels of physical activity in relation to deprivation. People in the most deprived areas of Scotland are less likely to be physically active than those in the least deprived areas. Just over half (54%) of people in the poorest areas meet the Scottish Government’s guidelines for physical activity, compared with three-quarters (74%) of those in the least deprived areas.

findings demonstrate that people in the most deprived areas are twice as likely to have two or more risk factors than those living in the least deprived areas.

Joanne McLean, Research Director of the Scottish Health Survey at ScotCen Social Research said: “The persisting health inequalities in the Scottish population is a matter for national concern. Improving the health outcomes of more deprived people in Scotland is one of the most important challenges for public health professionals and policymakers to address in the coming years. Given that people in more deprived areas are more likely to have multiple health risk factors, now may be the time for a more joined-up approach to public health interventions than we have previously seen.” “The relatively poor diet of Scottish children compared to adults is also a worry. Our research highlights the need for public health professionals, policy makers and families with children to do more to improve poor eating habits amongst children”