Organisation Within Socialism – Some Thoughts

The purpose of discussing socialism as a practical alternative is to help explain just how simple and straightforward the revolutionary transformation can be. We need to take positive steps to convince our fellow-workers that the mechanism of the revolution and administration inside socialism are simply not that important in the scheme of things: they should present no psychological barrier to someone becoming a socialist. We will keep whatever we can of capitalist structures, unless there is a very good reason for changing it.

We must distinguish between the democratic structures for getting rid of capitalism, and those needed for constructing socialism. The socialist transformation will require to set out to with the intent to capture political power across the globe. But developing decision-making for use inside socialism requires a very different approach. This distinction requires to be very clearly made.

The first is necessarily global and top-down in essence, using whatever democratic structures capitalism leaves us with. It needs to be "one-size fits-all", so that socialism starts with a relatively level playing field in terms of workers' class consciousness across the globe (we cannot have workers in one part of the world looking to workers elsewhere for leadership or guidance). But this issue has been well-examined in the past by the party and recent developments in global communications makes it even less likely that a socialist consciousness will develop in only certain parts of the planet.

The structures of decision-making necessary to implement socialism however are likely to require to be radically different from those inherited from capitalism. We should not confuse the organisation of capitalism with the motive of the market system. Certainly there are some aspects of production, distribution and the structures involved in capitalism which strongly reflect the market system it supports (e.g. armies), however we should be wary of throwing the baby (decision-making structures) out with the bathwater (the market-based motive for production). A healthier perspective is to continually emphasise that capitalism is about social relationships: the social system, the means underpinning capitalism will be fully available to socialism. Specifically in relation to decision-making inside socialism, we should be very wary of rejecting the structures or lines of communication left by capitalism. Sure, the internal structures of many organisations reflect their origin, but the decision-making processes inherited should surely be our first concern. It is a failing of some anarchist thought to fetishise the organisation or hierarchy, as being inherently oppresive or undemocratic. Rather than re-inventing the wheel or developing new decision-making structures separate to and different from those of capitalism, we should by default use the existing systems, unless an alternative is clearly better. When I drive on the A1 road I am following a route first made by Roman armies 2000 years ago: it doesn't however mean I necessarily approve of Rome's imperialist expansion.

Similarly we should view capitalism's decision-making structures as a social tool developed by humans and currently used to smooth the operation of capitalism. In the hands of a socialist majority, a switch will be flicked in this machine, and - with a little tweaking here and there - it will be available to help enable socialism. Socialism will not mean more meetings, committees etc: it will be a simpler version of production and decision-making than inside capitalism. If we don't present these arguments, by default it tends to be assumed that we are proposing some sort of unattractive continual global referendum.

In many ways the Socialist Party emphasise the use a socialist majority may make of existing capitalist structures. Specific organisations are well-identified (eg UN WHO, ILO etc)

Capitalism has four main decision-making systems of interest to socialists:

A. Firstly there is traditional local democracy, such as local parish, district or regional councils. In these, decisions are primarily made by and with regard to the interests of, a local community, defined geographically. Decisions can have a non-quantitative, non-monetary basis (eg visual impact of a new factory; safety concerns regarding a new by-pass)

B. Secondly there is National and Supra-national democratic structures, such as governments, the European Union, and the UN. At these levels, decisions are made with little impact on any particular locality and tend to be monetary-based. This is the level that various sectors of the capitalist class argue over how surplus value should best be apportioned and spent (taxation, wage levels, training and productivity investment, trade and tariff barriers etc). It is understandable that inside capitalism there will be a tendency to try and make these decisions at the highest level possible, where voters have less interest and less clout. Few people are interested (for example) in UK recycling and waste disposal options, but when a company wants to put an incinerator upwind, the village hall is packed out. Fortunately for the capitalist class, they don't need to come to your village hall and present the reasons why a certain level of unemployment should be accepted in the village. I would argue that while we can take some of capitalism's democratic leftovers, we should do so critically, and not blindly mimic the "levels" of decision-making that capitalism provides us with, nor over-emphasise the importance of the "upper" non-local levels of decision-making. I suspect that the more this issue is examined, the more apparent it will become that decision-making inside socialism will involve a huge shift from the global to the regional, and from the regional to the local.

C. Thirdly, there is decision-making within the workplace. Primarily this is regarding how production is organised. This has always been an area of interest to the left-wing, but strikes me as being of little interest now. "Can the workers run industry ?" is an old question that the left (via nationalisation) and the Party have addressed. It appears an outdated question now, one that few people actually ask. The workplace (particularly industrial ones) was the battleground in the 60s and 70s, as various left-wing strands of thought sought to fetishise the worker and the "point of production", and infiltrate trade unions for recruitment purposes. Instead we would argue that capitalism is a social relationship, that workers experience the class struggle in the many different ways, and that the workplace is not necessarily where workers' consciousness can be changed. That no-one really asks the question "can workers run industry ?" anymore, is to me, a measure of the extent to which capitalism has - on the one hand - managed to control workers outside of the workplace through consumerism, and - on the other hand - within the workplace has had to empower workers.

Capitalism does not fit with human beings too easily. As work (at least in the north/west) shifts from banging metal to using a mouse, capitalism needs workers to be able to use their brains, make decisions and take responsibility. This requirement cannot be turned on and off to suit the capitalist, so workplaces are increasingly being organised on a less hierarchical basis, with "quality circles" and upward appraisals (you appraise your manager), and providing control over when and how you work. In some sectors, employers are falling over themselves to offer flexible working with flat management structures ina "fun" workplace environment of cafes and pool tables: workers are responding less and less to simple increased salaries. Little wonder that less doubt is now expressed that workers can actually run industry - it is more apparent than ever before that they already do so.

D. The final decision-making arena is one that is not discussed in the 1985 report, but one which is - in my view - the most important. Most decisions regarding production and distribution are made inside capitalism by companies, firms, etc. Not so much with regard to the qualitative aspects of how a process is undertaken (that is discussed at 'C' above), but rather the simple quantitative issues of how much should be produced.

Of course, inside capitalism this simple issue is massively complicated by the fact that the raw materials coming into your factory, and the product being shipped out, will change in price by the second due to market, and (if you export/import) currency fluctuations, as hundreds of different and anarchic "business cycles" interact.

Nevertheless it should be recognised that the structure of supplier(s)-producer-customer(s) when multiplied up across the economy represents easily the most important decision-making system. (For example, the UN meets once every ten years to discuss Sustainable Development and your local council may employ one officer to address the subject. Yet the businesses in your area will make literally hundreds of decisions every day which will impact on this one issue).

Socialism would not seek to replace this decision-making structure. We should not try and make decisions about production through a separate local-regional-global democratic structure. We would keep companies and firms as they are. People would go and work as normal in them inside socialism. They would look at projections for demand of their product or service, whether directly from "consumers" or other firms ("customers"), they would establish production requirements for the week/month/year, and they would source suppliers and place orders for the raw materials they in turn will require on the basis of quality, turnaround and proximity.

If we put to one side those industries and services which will fall into total or almost complete disuse inside socialism (e.g. advertising, marketing, insurance , banking, military etc), the rest of capitalist production will carry on, if not quite seamlessly, then at least in much the same way as before. The only differences being how the factory or firm or office is organised internally (which would be left to the people themselves to sort out), and the absence of wages or prices. Companies would switch suppliers, and win or lose contracts on the basis of the quality and turnaround they can provide for their product. Resource depletion, transport costs and energy usage factors of production would start to be taken into account in a way that capitalism can only talk about. Decision-making would be devolved to the "consumer". The market system does empower the individual when it makes him/her a consumer, but only of course, if they have some money. Socialism would not discard this: the individual "consumer" in a money-free society will ultimately make the decisions on production, articulated through their demand when they take from the common stores of goods, according to self-defined need.

Many defenders of "free-market" (if there is such a thing) capitalism, call it an efficient system. And it is - compared to centralised state capitalism. Far better to have individuals deciding what products and how much they want to consume, than some central committee. The only problem with capitalism of course is that - expressed through money - some individuals have many more opportunities to make decisions than others do. While billions have $1 per day to vote with, Bill Gates and Richard Branson and a few others have millions of dollars-worth of nice votes to make.

Many non-socialists (and socialists for that matter) have expressed the view that socialist production will be a matter of meetings, referenda, committees etc. I would argue that we should not be seeking to establish democratic structures to decide and then dictate production levels throughout the "economy". Millions and millions of self-organised, self-defined units of production which occupy specific niches in the global economy, are already in operation inside capitalism, waiting to be transformed by the missing element (class-conscious workers) into the means of production and distribution that will define socialism.

These production units will not really have any power though - they will be responding to consumer demand. Do we want to go down the route of establishing local committees on glass production etc? Instead, the responsibility will be left to the producers (who are of course also consumers in their own right it should be remembered).

Where strategic decisions - rather than ones merely responding to demand - require to be made, (or there is a significant increase or decrease in demand) this may require production units in a particular industry to make decisions among themselves. Again this is not wishful thinking - this mimics what happens inside capitalism, with industry trade bodies. However rather than being mouthpieces for the capitalist class of that sector, they will be making decisions on behalf of the consumer to try and meet the changing demand requirements in that locality.

Society will delegate responsibility then, for glass production, to the relevant production units (sand quarrying, glass factory, general distribution networks). There will however be some areas where society will want to retain ultimate control. Two scenarios where decision-making regarding production will require "external" input are discussed here.

Firstly, perhaps increased demand for glass requirements will require more workers, or diversion of natural resources from another sector of industry. This could be achieved by diktat, by means of a council decision (at local, regional or global levels depending on the geographical scope of the problem). Alternatively however we should not forget the chaotic, self-organised decision-making model that is underpinned by the consumer. This is a highly democratic user-defined decision-making model that capitalism has claimed for itself but in fact operates on a distorted basis. Consumers in such a situation will also be far more free than they are inside capitalism, to make decisions based on more than just their material needs (e.g. for beer in a glass bottle) , and will switch to non-glass products if glass is getting scarce. Inside capitalism the consumer is just that and nothing else. In socialism though they are also producers in social production (e.g. factories), they are also producers in another sense - of waste. Recycling is a sensible measure and (again) one that capitalism finds extremely difficult to develop to any real extent, but which will occur where needed inside socialism as the consumer (informed and involved in society) feeds back decreased consumption of glass and increased recycling.

The second scenario where decision-making regarding production cannot just be left to the producers, is where local issues impact. The siting of a factory, the construction of a road etc may have positive impacts for society as a whole, but will have negative ones for those who have to breathe in traffic fumes or have the visual impact of a factory. Delineating the plusses and minuses of such developments, and trying to ensure that the benefits and the disadvantages impact fairly is a massive problem inside capitalism and it will remain a problem inside socialism. The way of resolving the issue will be the same - by means of decision-making at the appropriate level - local (for those affected by proximity) versus regional/global (for those affected as consumers). Of course, what causes so much of a ("Nimby") problem inside capitalism is the emotional attachment placed by someone on their property, the potential "amenity value" financial impact (e.g. reduction in value of their house), and the perception that someone is making money at their expense. While socialism would avoid or reduce some of these concerns, it is important to be realistic and recognise that it would not remove them all.

Brian Gardner

Glasgow Branch

The SPGB Vision

The Socialist Party holds a vision of a new world for which the process of social evolution has been maturing over the centuries, a system of common ownership and administration by a majority of the people, where no one set of human beings could any longer exploit and abuse others for profit, ending all the poverty, vices and disease generated by capitalism — a vicious system of every man for himself and devil take the innocent, helpless and the vulnerable. There would be no longer shameful seizure of the land and wealth of indigenous peoples in socialism. Peace would triumph over war which capitalism uses as a profitable investment. Socialism which is the next stage in social progress can and will create a new era of good living and happiness for the peoples of all countries who unite to fulfill the highest destiny of mankind.

The Socialist Party has always insisted that the worldwide problems of capitalism will lead workers quite independently of ourselves to grasp the need for a rationally organised society where mankind as a whole can plan production without being hampered by class or national limitations. To those workers arriving at these conclusions we want to extend the hand of socialist fraternity. And above all we want to work with them as comrades in the struggle to establish a socialist world.

The Socialist Party maintains that there can be no fundamental change in the living conditions of the people while a belligerent  minority holds economic power over the natural resources and keeps the right to exploit the majority for individual gain.

The Socialist Party insist that the basis of exploitation — the use of men and women for personal profits and power — lie in the capitalist system. Reforms do not remove the villain of the piece from the scene of action. While he holds economic power the people will bear the weight of any measures of partial reform.

The Socialist Party believe that the fundamental basis of a true socialist society must be change from a capitalist system of ownership, exploitation and control to one of common ownership, democratic administration and control of the affairs of a nation by the men and women who produce its wealth.

The Socialist Party does not want a bloody revolution. Revolution means change. There have been revolutions in art, industry and social relations which have not caused bloodshed. The Socialist Party declares that they have the right to organise and educate the people so that they will be able to bring about the change in the basis of the State and of our social system. By so doing, we believe they reduce the dangers of “bloody” revolution, which do not come from us in any case. The Socialist Party believes that the new system of social ownership and administration can be introduced by parliamentary measures which express the will of the people. Socialism can be introduced by constitutional means.

Ask yourselves this question, who opposes this vision of a new social system: this plan for a social system based on justice and peace?

You know who? the multi-billionaires who profit by ignorance and the fear they impose. Socialists threaten their profits, their right to exploit and subjugate workers to their greed for wealth and power. Socialists consider it necessary to provide for material needs in order that men and women may develop their highest mental facilities. A plant grows to its most perfect flowering and finest fruit in good soil.

Socialism, sooner or later

As more people involve themselves in political questions and look for real causes and solutions, much more will be expected and needed from the Socialist Party. Socialism places its hope in the ability of people to reach high levels of political consciousness and to substitute its rule for the authority of a propertied class. Few topics are being more widely discussed these days than the rebuilding of the socialist movement. All sorts of people are talking to each other who previously would have found themselves in the same room. Left-wing scholars of widely divergent views have shared platforms with a whole new library of books, each author working to achieve a fresh understanding of contemporary capitalism which are turning into debates periodicals which call themselves socialist. Many thousands of radicals are trying to separate the wheat from the chaff. The Socialist Party holds to the conviction of the soundness of principles and trust in our fellow-workers class. Pessimism is not permissible in the Socialist Party, although we do admit to impatience. The Socialist Party knows that social evolution will make the working class revolutionary. Our arguments are too powerful to be withstood; our reasoning is too strong to be denied. Socialism can only be brought in by active men and women. It is not passive agreement that is wanted, but organised workers. It is possible to carry on our propaganda without funds, but without workers never. The working class must proceed to its emancipation as a class. Individual acts and individual effort can never throw off the capitalist oppressor. . Every step must be taken as a class; every battle must be fought on class lines; every activity, no matter whether on the industrial field or in the political arena, must be carried through as part of the class plan of action. What does this mean? What can it mean but organisation —organisation on the industrial field and organisation in the political arena. The unity of aim which is essential. Without principles there can be no sound organisation.

Ideas do not stand still. For example, we have seen important changes in attitude towards sexuality, marriage, gender and the family. These changes—which have happened worldwide—are the process of the working class feeling their way towards the conclusion that a fundamental social change is the only way to harmonise relationships within society.

In other words, there is every reason to think that the socialist revolution will be, to all intents and purposes, simultaneous throughout the world. For a time it may gather greater momentum in one country than in another, but this will quickly adjust itself. As socialism becomes a more possible reality is there will be a rush toward it.

We are asked to believe that the working class intelligence is not capable of solving the simple problem of distributing that wealth among the people who produce it. We say it is a lie; the solution is ridiculously easy. We have simply to sweep away those who stand between us and all that is good under the sun. We have to take away from them all the sources of wealth and all the means of producing wealth, and to use them for the satisfaction of our own needs.

The Socialist Party has no illusions. We recognise that the fight will be long and hard. The industrial barons and the lords of capital and their political pawns have made it clear they will use every form of force in their desperation to hold onto their stolen billions. Socialism has been attacked and incriminated at all times, with every kind of wickedness. But with socialism, solidarity will be the basis of society. The reformists say that capitalism isn’t what it used to be. Marx was no doubt right in his time, they say... but that was well over a century ago. But can these people tell us what exactly has changed in terms of the exploitation of the working class? Has capitalism changed its spots? There is still the exploitative capitalist system.

Socialists seek a better world founded on common ownership, equality and democracy, where the means to meet all mankind’s material needs is raised to the greatest possible height. Capitalism has resulted in a worldwide rise in social inequality, poverty, disease and threats to the environment. What socialism is all about is the conquest of human freedom for the greatest possible number to decide their own fate.

To fight against capitalism in which human beings are despised, alienated, exploited, oppressed or denied basic human dignity, to dedicated your life to defend the exploited, the oppressed, the downtrodden, the despised.

There is no better way to be a good human being in this world than to dedicate your life to this cause.

Socialism can prove itself a superior system as it brings about a far better livelihood for the masses of people than capitalism. Capitalism makes true democracy unachievable for the majority. Behind the facade of formal democratic institutions, the real power is exercised by and for the capitalist class. The capitalists, through their powerful lobbies and campaign funding, dominate the political process, insuring that candidates favourable to their interests are elected. An elaborate powerful civil and military bureaucracy, which is materially and ideologically tied to the capitalist class, forms the core of the state. This bureaucracy remains wedded to the capitalist class. In its infancy, the capitalist class championed democracy in its fight to displace feudalism. But now, it is democracy’s implacable enemy. While capitalism engenders democratic illusions, it makes their realisation impossible. While the working class recognises that no amount of democracy can abolish class oppression, it also recognises that the greater the democracy, the more direct, the more open and the broader the class struggle. And the more the working class has the freedom to organise and struggle, the more it will see that its oppression stems from capitalism.

The co-operative commonwealth, a world socialist community,

The wages workers receive represent wealth that they have themselves produced; the profits that the capitalist pockets represent wealth that the wage workers produced, and that the capitalist, that the capitalist steals from them. Labour alone produces all wealth. Wages are that part of labor’s own product that the workingman is allowed to keep. Profits are the present and running theft perpetrated by the capitalist upon the workingman from day to day, from week to week, from month to month, from year to year. Capital is the accumulated past theft of the capitalist, corner-stoned upon his “original accumulation.” The capitalist class in general, may perform some “work,” they do perform some “work,” but that “work” is not of a sort that directly or indirectly aids production. It is not the capitalist who supports the worker, but the worker supports the capitalist.

The Socialist Party vision is one of the co-operative commonwealth or the industrial democracy. The future society comes only at the desire and with the consent of the workers, for it is evidently the only class able to safeguard humanity by means of a new society. The Socialist Party is revolutionary in aim because it will be out for the abolition of the wages system, and for securing to the workers the full fruits of their labour, thereby seeking to change the system of society from capitalist to socialist. It is revolutionary in method, because it will refuse to enter into any agreement with the masters or its State backing. The curse of capitalism consists in this — that a handful of capitalists can compel workers to work in such manner and for such wage as will please the capitalists. Reformism serves the ruling class because it fights to protect the foundation of capitalism, the “right” of the capitalist to exploit the labour power of the working class. Whoever tries to reconcile the exploited to their condition, objectively serves the interests of the exploiter. If you do not put forward a clear class perspective on all struggles and do not warn people that these issues cannot be resolved under the present capitalist system, then you have adopted reformist politics: i.e. the capitalist system is basically okay but in need of serious reform and new management. Programmes of “public” ownership is not socialism. Socialism, however, leads the struggle of the working class not only for better terms for the sale of labour power, but for the abolition of the social system that compels the propertyless to sell themselves to the rich.

The slogans "an injury to one is an injury to all" and "workingmen of all countries—unite," means something when said by the Socialist Party. The mutual economic interests, the daily association, the common experiences of the social conflict, must surely develop that solidarity

without which workers may struggle in vain. Worldwide in the scope of its activities, socialism points to a new civilisation where the forces of production and distribution will be adjusted and co-ordinated—where those who labour will enjoy—where childhood will be free—where adulthood will be secure—where mankind shall be in harmony with the world about it. The Socialist Party believes that advances of human society so far in economy, science, technology and standards of civil life have already created the material conditions necessary to set up a free society without classes, exploitation and oppression, i.e.

The wages workers receive represent wealth that they have themselves produced; the profits that the capitalist pockets represent wealth that the wage workers produced, and that the capitalist, that the capitalist steals from them. Labor alone produces all wealth. Wages are that part of labor’s own product that the workingman is allowed to keep. Profits are the present and running theft perpetrated by the capitalist upon the workingman from day to day, from week to week, from month to month, from year to year. Capital is the accumulated past stealings of the capitalist, cornerstoned upon his “original accumulation.” The capitalist class in general, may perform some “work,” they do perform some “work,” but that “work” is not of a sort that directly or indirectly aids production. It is not the capitalist who supports the worker, but the worker supports the capitalist.

The Socialist Party vision is one of the co-operative commonwealth or the industrial democracy. The future society comes only at the desire and with the consent of the workers, for it is evidently the only class able to safeguard humanity by means of a new society. The Socialist Party is revolutionary in aim because it will be out for the abolition of the wages system, and for securing to the workers the full fruits of their labour, thereby seeking to change the system of society from capitalist to socialist. It is revolutionary in method, because it will refuse to enter into any agreement with the masters or its State backing. The curse of capitalism consists in this — that a handful of capitalists can compel workers to work in such manner and for such wage as will please the capitalists. Reformism serves the ruling class because it fights to protect the foundation of capitalism, the “right” of the capitalist to exploit the labour power of the working class. Whoever tries to reconcile the exploited to their condition, objectively serves the interests of the exploiter. If you do not put forward a clear class perspective on all struggles and do not warn people that these issues cannot be resolved under the present capitalist system, then you have adopted reformist politics: i.e. the capitalist system is basically okay but in need of serious reform and new management. Programmes of “public” ownership is not socialism. Socialism, however, leads the struggle of the working class not only for better terms for the sale of labour power, but for the abolition of the social system that compels the propertyless to sell themselves to the rich.

The slogans "an injury to one is an injury to all" and "workers of all countries—unite," means something when said by the Socialist Party. The mutual economic interests, the daily association, the common experiences of the social conflict, must surely develop that solidarity without which workers may struggle in vain. Worldwide in the scope of its activities, socialism points to a new civilisation where the forces of production and distribution will be adjusted and co-ordinated—where those who labour will enjoy—where childhood will be free—where adulthood will be secure—where mankind shall be in harmony with the world about it. The Socialist Party believes that advances of human society so far in economy, science, technology and standards of civil life have already created the material conditions necessary to set up a free society without classes, exploitation and oppression, i.e. a world socialist community.

We march towards the future.

Socialism is a subject of importance to all working people. If it is socialism we wish to attain our tactics will have to be developed accordingly. Socialism, as the Socialist Party understands it, means common ownership of the means of production, and their democratic management by the workers. Our aim is to put an end to the capitalism, a putrid, stinking system long ago fit for the grave. The last gasps of capitalism becomes shorter, and more choked. The Socialist Party believes that the basic problem of our time resides in society. We believe that humanity can develop a healthy society of plenty and peace. As socialists we affirm the possibility and necessity for men and women to work together to build a new and decent society, and that means primarily the class which has most to gain from and can alone construct socialism: the working class. The “Welfare State” serves to camouflage the true nature of capitalism. Capitalism is an economic system of unremitting expansion, of the ceaseless search for new markets for production, new fields for investment, and new sources of raw materials. Increasing trade, international investment, and the rise of the multinationals have all served to exacerbate competition. Capitalists have substantial foreign holdings.

History is not some automatic process in which men are merely puppets; history is the activity of men functioning within the limits of their situation. And today that situation cries for a socialist solution. Capitalism is at a loss to reconstruct the world, it cannot achieve the most simple reorganisation of production and distribution to harmonise it with Nature. The gigantic productive facilities which it unleashed for war cannot be used for peace. Starvation and poverty in the midst of plenty; uprooting of millions of people; renewed totalitarianism; diplomatic hypocrisy; destruction of the environment are part of the catalogue of the capitalist society so it can continue indefinitely. The society is sick, moribund, overripe for change. It is beyond redemption, beyond reform. No alternative exists except a thorough socialist reconstruction. And that is the program to which the working class, for all its present confusion and political immaturity, will have to turn if it is not to sink completely into a new era of barbarism. Struggle is an inescapable condition of existence for the working class under capitalism; it will continue until there is a triumphant ending. There is no other road. Either chaos and destruction – or socialist reconstruction. The socialist perspective is more valid, more essential than ever because it alone meets the problems of our times. It alone proposes a program that is realisable and which is a comprehensive solution to all of our social problems. the realisation of this program depends upon the people who believe in it and fight for it. What we do will help determine the future. We stand together with our comrades throughout the world.

Socialism is the realisation of the abolition of all forms of exploitation of man, by man, of all forms of oppression and injustice. The leading force in transforming society from capitalism to socialism is the working class i.e. wage workers who earn their livelihood through the sale of their labour power and have no other means of support. By working people is meant all who work for a livelihood and do not exploit the labour of others. The Socialist Party proposes a “guide to action” for the working class in the struggle to achieve political power and to build socialism. The Socialist Party maintains that the interests of the working class and the interests of the capitalist class are irreconcilable and that therefore, the interests of the working class can not be served through collaboration or alliance with the capitalists but in opposition to them. From these conflicting interests of the two basic classes capitalists and workers, arises an antagonism, a struggle, between the two classes: the class struggle. The solution to the basic problems of our people in the United States can only come as the result of a profound revolutionary transformation of our society That is, only socialism can provide the context to build a society free from exploitation, racism, oppression and war. It is only the working class which has the capacity to overthrow capitalism, in the struggle for the abolition of all classes.

The coming years will undoubtedly be even more decisive for the future of socialism in the world. Being Marxists those in the Socialist Party are optimists. The cooperative commonwealth is an inevitable evolution of capitalist society. 

We don't know everything, but we don't know nothing.

Glasgow has unveiled plans to become the first UK city to reduce its greenhouse emissions to net-zero. The city wants to reach the target before 2045, beating the Scotland-wide ambition announced by the Scottish government earlier this month.

 The plans include mass charging points for electric vehicles.  Net-zero is the point where the same volume of greenhouse gases is being emitted as is being absorbed through offsetting techniques like forestry. Perhaps an even better term would be "climate neutral".

A commendable aspiration but will it have any significant effect on global warming?

Capitalism has inflicted incalculable harm on the inhabitants of the earth. Tragically, the future could be even worse for a simple reason: capitalism’s destructive power, driven by its inner logic to expand, is doing irreversible damage to life in all its forms all around the planet. Rosa Luxemburg famously said that humanity had a choice, “socialism or barbarism.” In these days of climate change, her warning has even more meaning. Almost daily we hear of species extinction, global warming, resource depletion, deforestation, desertification, and on and on to the point where we are nearly accustomed to this gathering catastrophe. 

Our planet cannot indefinitely absorb the impact of profit-driven, growth-without-limits capitalism. Unless we radically change our methods of production and pattern of consumption, we will reach the point where the harmful effects to the environment will become irreversible. Even the most modest measures of environmental reform are resisted by sections of the capitalist class. The goal of the big corporations is to secure the greatest possible profits for their super-rich owners — regardless of the consequences to the planet and its people. This makes the establishment of a socialist society all the more imperative.

One way or another, the coming decades will be decisive for the fate of human civilisation. Unless greenhouse emissions are swiftly and drastically curbed the result will be environmental catastrophe on an almost unimaginable scale, threatening civilisation as we know it. The reality of climate change is already manifesting itself in an increasing number of extreme weather events, such as heat-waves, droughts, floods and typhoons. Melting ice sheets are resulting in rising sea levels and increased flooding of low-lying areas. Some islands will soon be totally submerged, turning their inhabitants into climate refugees.

Many environmentalist campaigners include over-population as a contributory factor to the global warming crisis. Where children die and women are repressed, population booms. Where children thrive, and women are empowered, population growth stops. As people become more prosperous, which includes being better fed and having lower child mortality, the fewer children women want. Providing they then have access to family planning methods, the fertility rates will drop and the population will cease to grow. Therefore, what those environmentalists have to do is, first and foremost, engage and campaign for social justice. 

Imagine an alternative, a society where each individual has the means to live a life of dignity and fulfilment, without exception; where discrimination and prejudice are wiped out; where all members of society are guaranteed a decent life, the means to contribute to society; and where the environment is protected and rehabilitated. This is socialism — a truly humane, a truly ecological society.

The goal is revolution

Socialism has been grossly distorted, both by open opponents and by alleged adherents. This situation necessitates peeling away of entrenched myths to rediscover its authentic revolutionary teachings. Marx's writings cannot be treated as Holy Scripture. (To do so is a gross insult to a thinker whose motto for his own work was "Doubt everything.") What a socialist society would look like is not drawn in detail. Marx analysed the capitalist society he lived in and projected his vision of socialism from the clues he found in capitalist society. Because he was scientific, he refused to engage in any elaborate pictures of the socialist future but kept to a minimum outline. 

Workers’ control of production can’t be a partial matter. To be more than self-administration within the confines of Capital, workers’ control must be total, that is, it must take over all production decisions. Capitalism cannot “grow into” socialism. Socialists must overthrow the capitalists class antagonisms and the class struggle must be emphasised; instead of compromise with capitalism, relentless attack upon the whole capitalist regime as determined by conditions. Socialism aims at giving a meaning to the life and work of people; at enabling their freedom, their creativity and the most positive aspects of their personality to flourish. It is about creating links between the individual and those around him, and between the group and society; at ending the barriers between manual and mental work; at reconciling people with their roots and with nature. These are not longings relating to some hazy and distant future. They are feelings and tendencies existing and manifesting themselves today. To grasp this is to perceive that socialism is not "nationalisation" or even an "increase in living standards". It is to transform one's vision of society and of the world. Socialism is the system where means of production are owned by society as a whole, not private persons.

To make revolution and put an end to capitalism, people must have a clear plan. The alternative to capitalism is socialism but even if capitalism is detestable isn't socialism just as detestable too? It was socialism that the people of Russia and Eastern Europe rejected. On their evidence, socialism as a system of society was even more bureaucratic, unjust and inefficient than capitalism? Capitalism is here to stay, so let's try to reform it a little. 

The purpose of the Socialist Party is to restore to socialism its true essence; and to present a real socialist alternative to the cynicism and apathy that now paralyses the progressives. Real socialism is the only alternative to capitalism.

To define a state as capitalist or socialist is to define it according to its nature, that is, its class nature. Of which class is it the instrument? The interests of which class does it protect and serve? These are the questions such a definition answers. To define a state as totalitarian is to define it not by its nature, but by its form; e.g. is it democratic or dictatorial? The Soviet Union and its satellite states were certainly one in which the bureaucrats who run the administration and the managers who run industry hold power in which“private property in the instruments of production was abolished but where the decisive sections of industry and economic enterprises were owned by the state and not controlled by the people but by a small clique of bureaucrats or managers.” All this prevailed in the Soviet Union. In other words, the apparatchiks and nomenklatura expropriated the working class.

Reformists sees socialism as something which comes ‘from above’. It is to be achieved, on workers’ behalf, by an enlightened minority – political leaders. ‘Leave it to us,’ they say. ‘All you need do is vote at election time’. Working people are expected to play a purely passive role, just looking on while others transform society for them. That's how capitalist society is organised. Working people are constantly told that the only people qualified to run society are the experts – the managers, civil servants, politicians, the technocrats. The Socialist Party utterly rejects this elitist approach. Only workers can liberate themselves. No one can do it for them. In Marx’s words, socialism is ‘the self-emancipation of the working class’.

By revolution, we mean the overthrow of the capitalist ruling class and the basic economic system of society. We believe a revolution is necessary because the problems of this society – the economic problems of inflation and recession, national oppression, social ills – are all the product of the capitalist system itself. The basic nature of capitalism is that while the vast majority of people work and produce the wealth of society, a handful of capitalists control all the wealth – the factories, mines, railroads and fields, and all the profits that are produced. The possessing class prosper at the expense of the vast majority of the people, and their constant drive for profit and more profit results in only more problems and suffering for the people. The Socialist Party holds that no amount of reform of the present system can offer any lasting improvements, security or stability for the majority of people, nor fundamentally alter their position in society. 

The ruling class always tries to limit or negate those concessions that have been won. The ruling class will always do this so long as it holds the power of society; it will try to milk everything it can from the working people to enrich or protect its own interests. The act of putting ideas into words should be a means of achieving greater clarity and understanding, for writer as well as reader. It should help to clear the way for action, but often smooth words and rounded phrases when used by the reformists serve only as a brake on action. They promised a world without war, without want and without insecurity but their palliative policies reflect not an advance towards socialism but an adaptation to capitalism. 

Food Wasted Scotland

Food waste is a bigger cause of climate change than plastics, according to Zero Waste Scotland.

When food waste ends up in landfill it rots, producing methane gas, one of the most damaging greenhouse gases driving climate change.

Research by Zero Waste Scotland found that 456,000 tonnes of food waste was collected in Scotland in 2016. About 224,000 tonnes of plastic waste was collected that year.

Zero Waste Scotland Chief executive Iain Gulland said:"Food waste is actually a bigger cause of climate change than plastics."

However, he added it was still vital to reduce plastic waste, which remains an "extremely serious issue". It also causes damage to the environment and wildlife when discarded inappropriately.

Zero Waste Scotland calculated that the carbon footprint of food waste collected from Scottish households that year was nearly three times that of plastic waste collected from people's homes, at roughly 1.9 million tonnes of carbon dioxide equivalent (MtCO2e) compared to 0.73MtCO2e.

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-48257019