The World For All

For ourselves, socialism is impossible without democracy, both in how we organise and in what we organise for. We practice what we preach. Our job, as socialists, is to find a way to propose radical ideas and democratic practices, even though we may risk being marginalised or even ostracised. The Socialist Party is infused with democratic principles. What most concerns us is to lay the foundation of an for the policy of the cooperative commonwealth. Socialism aims at giving a meaning to people's life and work; enabling freedom and permitting the positive aspects of people’s personality to flourish; creating connections between the individual and those around us and reconciling humanity with nature. These are not aspirations for some hazy and distant future but our immediate demands for today. Socialism is not "nationalisation" nor "central planning" or even an "increase in the standard of living." It is to understand that the real crisis of capitalism is due to "the anarchy of the market." The task of the Socialist Party is transform our vision of society and our conception of the world. Socialism is working people's conscious direction of their own lives. Capitalism divides society. Socialist society implies people's self-organisation and entails the immediate abolition of the division of society into conflicting classes. Workers' self-management will be possible only if people's attitudes alter radically and running society becomes a meaningful part of our daily lives when people it. Analyse the case for socialism. Criticise if you so wish, by all means, but apply reason to the matter as well, for by so doing better understanding, greater knowledge, and a speedier establishment of the Socialist Commonwealth will result. One of the important facts of capitalist life is that it is a class divided system, in which two groups of people, between them making up the population of the developed world, face each other in conflict over the ownership of wealth. The parties of capitalism try to hide this fact, by talking about a unity of interests, about everyone working for the national good as if the interests of the coal miner are the same as those of the stock holder. As the interests of the two classes in society to day are in conflict, sooner or later the conflict must be determined. Therefore it would be wise for the working class, being the class seeking its emancipation, to be ready with its alternative. And what alternative have they but socialism?

Political parties are themselves fighting the class war, but on the other side of the line. They stand for the interests of the ruling class, for the propping up of a social system in which a minority own and control the means of living with all that follows from that in terms of poverty against privilege, freedom against repression. Any differences they may have are over the tactics to be used in that propping up and in fighting that class war. At times, a government may decide on the tactics of confrontation; at others they may use the policy of conciliation, of trying to persuade the workers on the other side of the struggle not to use any power they may have, to negotiate rather than use force in the sense of a strike or something similar. And when it comes to an election they are again united, in their respective appeal to the political naivety of the working class who are open to be convinced that minor differences on issues like trade are worth voting for or against. This should be a lesson to anyone who thinks it possible to make progress towards socialism with a policy of compromise with political ignorance or of winning support on day-to-day issues.

Mankind has developed vast technological possibilities. At present, however, there is gulf between what is potentially possible and what is actually realised. The contrast between the two and the question of how to reconcile them is the most pressing problem that confronts mankind today.

Concrete examples abound.

That people go hungry despite the fact that it is technologically possible to feed the world;

That schools, factories, homes, etc., are not built in sufficient numbers to satisfy the need for them—despite the necessary materials and manpower being available.  

That not enough of the many other items that are necessary for a pleasant human existence are produced—despite the existence of the requisite powers for their production and we have already witnessed under the current pandemic that hospitals can be providedand factories transformed to produce vital equipment and supplies in a matter of days;

That artistic and intellectual development, and scientific and medical research is limited—despite the vast human potential for such development;

That millions of people in the world are deprived of  the opportunity to usefully employ their talents—despite their desire contribute their talents and skills.

The answer to the problem of how to realise humanity’s full potential lies in the replacement of the present society with a new social system in which everyone owns the means of living in common— socialism where the wealth collectively produced will belong to everyone. Each person will have equal rights of access to the shared store-houses, each will determine her/his own needs and take freely from the common stock. This concept of wealth distribution is termed “free access”, and it means precisely that. For in socialism, the wealth of the planet will not be bought or sold on a market, it will not be exchanged for money, but rather it will be made freely available so that anyone who needs it can take it.

Because it will not be restricted by the market and the profit motive, production create the abundance that it is now technologically capable of. Production in socialism to satisfy society’s needs, not for profit. Because there will be no market, the work currently done by millions of people will become unnecessary. Socialism will have no need the services performed by those who work in finance, in banks, insurance companies or building societies. Nor will it need check-out cashiers or security personnel. Also, socialism will not require the police, prison guards, armed forces, legal and judicial systems, nor the vast media organisations whose main tasks are the ideological maintenance of the dominant position of the owning class. Instead of doing these socially useless jobs, the people presently undertaking them would, in socialism, together with those who are now unemployed, be able to be constructive and creative. Socialism will mean the liberation of mankind from such useless and uncreative work and the mobilisation of all human abilities for the extension of human abilities.

Testing to Destruction (1987)

 

Book Review from the April 1987 issue of the Socialist Standard

Poisoned Reign. French Nuclear Colonialism in the Pacific by Bengt Danielsson and Marie-Therese Danielsson (Penguin Books 1986)
On 10 July 1985 the Greenpeace ship Rainbow Warrior was blown up in Auckland harbour by two French agents. This act might appear to be surprising, considering the fact that both France and New Zealand are members of the "free world". This book tells the story of how successive French governments, including the "socialists" who changed from opposition to support, have been determined to use French Polynesia for nuclear weapons testing and not let any opposition get in the way.

The post-war years saw the great European empires in decline. When the French were being kicked out of Algeria, they were on the lookout for an alternative nuclear testing site to the Sahara. French Polynesia seemed the best bet — its islands are spread over an area the size of Europe and the 120,000 inhabitants were easy-going and the French had been manipulating them for years. The fact that the South Pacific is rich in food, metals and oil was another reason to maintain French dominance.

Other countries at this time were also testing nuclear weapons — the British at Christmas Island, the Americans in the Marshall Islands, the Russians in Siberia, and the Chinese in parts of Mongolia and Tibet. None of them showed much concern for the effects this would have on the local population.

When the French nuclear testing programme was announced in the early sixties the local people were mostly opposed to it. But this opposition was ineffective — the islands were run from France and the various institutions available to the islanders, to have a say in their affairs, were powerless. The authorities used various methods, devious and oppressive, to neutralise this opposition.

On 2 July 1966 the first French nuclear bomb was exploded above Moruroa Atoll. The French President, de Gaulle, was there to observe. He had made many flowery speeches claiming a great regard for. and affinity with, the Polynesian people, who were the first overseas territory to recognise the Free French during the war and who had sent a battalion to two world wars.

The French nuclear authorities, when dismissing the dangers of the tests, had said that the bombs would only be exploded when the wind was blowing east, away from the inhabited areas. This was despite the fact that winds in the South Pacific can blow in many different directions during the same day. However, when de Gaulle was there the wind kept blowing straight towards inhabited areas. Rather than keep the General waiting, the bomb was exploded anyway. The fall-out reached as far west as Fiji and Samoa. Islanders in the vicinity of Moruroa were given advice on how to protect themselves They were told not to drink rain water or eat fish for a while. This advice was not particularly helpful as this is precisely what the islanders exist on.

The nuclear programme had other effects on the islanders. Many of them were needed to work on the project. They were enticed to Tahiti by high wages only to end up in slums around Papeete, the largest town. They had to endure filthy conditions and crime, prostitution and drunkenness all increased sharply. As most of the work was needed at the start of the programme, when this finished they found themselves unemployed and unable to get back to their islands, as they had been promised.

By 1974, 42 French nuclear bombs had been exploded in the Pacific skies. Due to pressure from other Pacific countries and environmentalists the French government decided to continue its testing underground. They still used Moruroa. despite the fact that a Pacific atoll is one of the worst possible sites. The rock is thin and brittle and the many tests carried out almost certainly caused radioactive leakage and contamination of fish, plankton, shells, dams and squid regularly eaten by the local population.

The extent of the pollution caused by these tests and their resulting effect on the population can only be guessed at, as the authorities engage in the usual practice of secrecy and cover up. No reliable health figures are published and safety standards certainly appear lax. Much of the nuclear waste was dumped on the north of the atoll and washed away by several cyclones and tidal floods which have become more common in recent years. Some of these tidal waves will have been caused by explosions blowing out the side of the atoll, spilling out its radioactive muck. The fact that by 1985, 115 French nuclear devices had been detonated in the Pacific along with 106 American and 21 British, does not bode well for the future health of the islanders.

The authors tell the story of the French nuclear programme well, but their analysis of why it took place, with stories of politicians' duplicity and pride is weak. They clearly disapprove of French attempts to keep up with the superpowers and be independent and are sad that French public opinion doesn't seem to care. Unfortunately, the fact that any capitalist government exists to defend its national interest, and will develop whatever weapons it can to do this, with scant regard for the effects on people, escapes them.

There was a statement recently from a French government spokesman that they might stop nuclear testing at Moruroa as even they think that the atoll cannot take any more blasts. The underground rock is apparently in a very fragile, unstable condition. This will come as a relief to the people in the Pacific, although others had better watch out — the spokesman said they were searching the North Atlantic for an alternative.

Ian Ratcliffe

Dundee

Our Future is Socialism

Capitalist society abounds in paradoxes which appear monstrous, insane and perverse. The workings of capitalism must appear bewildering in their contradictions and absurdities.

Under capitalism wealth can be produced in practically unlimited quantities, and yet the great majority of people live and die deprived of the good things in life, sometimes slightly above the poverty line, sometimes just below it, but always approximately at the bare subsistence level. Deep poverty prevails in the midst of vast abundance. Food is produced to excess, yet millions of hungry and underfed men, women, and children are never able to obtain a satisfactory meal. There is more than enough housing accommodation to shelter everyone quite adequately, yet families are compelled to live in one small, badly-ventilated and cheerless room.

Let us take another paradox of capitalism. The harder a person works the sooner he or she is out of a job, debarred from obtaining the things necessary for his or her well-being. The men and women who do the work of the world, without whose efforts human life on this planet would cease to function, are the poorest, economically, physically, and mentally, while on the other hand the people who do nothing useful or necessary, who indeed are the drones living on the honey produced by the workers, are the people to whom all the good things of life accrue. The wonders of nature, of art and science and literature, are open to the latter people—the members of the capitalist class — whereas all the workers can look forward to is a life of hard and generally sordid work, their reward for which is just a sufficiency of food, clothing, and shelter necessary to enable them to exist and to breed and rear a progeny, who in their turn will supply the place of their parents when the latter are considered by their masters unfit for anything but, the industrial scrap-heap.

It is the Socialist Party’s task to advocate a system wherein the means of production and distribution shall be socially owned and controlled. Wealth at the present time is only produced by the will of, and for the benefit of, the few who own the instruments whereby it is produced, and is naturally therefore, the sole property of those few. When the whole of the people have obtained control of the instruments of wealth production, of course, the wealth then produced will be the property of the whole of the people. Nothing could be simpler or more logical.

Yet the majority of the members of our class, so greatly are they saturated with capitalist indoctrination, that they  favour the present system, while the Socialist Party position obtains little hearing and small support.

As, however, capitalism develops and the paradoxes become more glaring and more ridiculous, the Socialist Party view-point will continue to reach the understanding of the people. It is our assurance is that the members of our class will organise with us for the purpose of hastening the downfall of capitalism and of establishing the system of socialism, the ramifications and workings of which, admittedly, are as yet but dimly perceived, even by those who have devoted almost a lifelong study to the subject, but which the youngest socialist amongst us knows bears within it the potential of life undreamed of in this insane and inane system which we now live—or rather vegetate.

Vaccines: Free for All or a Free-for-all

More than 250 public interest groups  including Doctors Without Borders and Oxfam, urged global cooperation as scientists around the world work to develop treatments and a vaccine for the coronavirus, warning against "nationalistic" or monopoly-based responses to the pandemic.

"There is real danger that access to medical breakthroughs addressing COVID-19 will be restricted by nation, by price, by limited production and fragmented supply lines, and by exclusivity and commercial confidentiality. We must prevent this—and help change medical innovation, health, and nationalism," reads the open letter.


"There is a grave danger that research efforts will be stymied and access for many patients to COVID-19 treatments and vaccines will be delayed by limited manufacturing capacity, commercial secrecy, and monopolies on key medical technologies, as well as by hostility to global cooperation," said Public Citizen in a statement. 

https://www.commondreams.org/news/2020/04/24/international-coalition-public-health-advocates-denounces-any-big-pharma-effort

We are world socialists

The Socialist Party is for the overthrow of capitalism, for the new world which awaits our fellow-workers when they have discarded their chains—a world in which no-one shall be another's master: all shall be free.

Divorced from the ownership of the necessary tools of production, the workers are compelled to sell the only power they possess—the power to labour—and in return receive wages which represent in the main only the bare necessaries needed to produce that labour power, despite the fact that their energy, applied to the materials they work with adds value to the subject of their labour. The products, however, remain the property of the masters, who proceed to realise their profits by selling the products on the market. Thus, being dependent upon the masters, the workers are enslaved and subjected to exploitation, which grows more and more intense, with the result that ever more quickly markets are flooded and more workers are thrown on their own resources—which means that they are at liberty to starve.

Always tinged with the insatiable greed for wealth, the solutions offered by the master class fall short, as that very profit lust is the expression of the causes of the problem and it cannot be solved without their self-abolition or without the working class organsing for that purpose.

While production is social the product is privately owned, and as the workers can only absorb wealth according to their meagre purchasing-power, and the master class cannot dispose of the surplus wealth even by indulging in stupendous orgies of waste, distributing centres become choked with wealth and the cycle of unemployment and starvation in the midst of plenty is gone over again until the wealth is gradually absorbed and the channels once more freed. Private ownership, then, is the root cause of the problem; and it is at the root cause we must strike.

Capitalism is rotten, as is evident from a glance over the headlines in any newspaper. Crime, disease, oppression, starvation, indicate the social and economic bankruptcy of the system of private ownership of property, and we of the working class can confidently go ahead to wield ourselves into the party which shall take the helm and usher in the system that, for the first time in the history of man, shall make freedom possible. While the masters are futilely trying to "pluck the nettle," we socialists shall continue the educational work and grow a working-class party determined to make use of the political power to weed out capitalism which chokes all that is best in human relations.

Fellow-workers, how long will you go in your hopelessness, and let the parasite class lecture you? Discover the simplicity of your emancipation; see the hope that lies in your dormant mighty strength, and, rouse yourselves to sweep away for ever the subjection of our class. Capitalism is based on exploitation, selling commodities and realising as big a profit as possible. There is no other way of running the system. Capitalism itself produces greed, corruption poverty and war through the artificial production of scarcity and the exploitation for its own ends. The only way to end inequality is to end capitalism, world-wide; to abolish the profit system and abolish states and borders.

We are not the only political organisation calling ourselves socialist. Anyone seeking to understand what is wrong with present-day society will come across others, all having some such word in their names as “socialist”, “workers”, “revolutionary” or “communist”. Most of these will be of Leninist or Trotskyist origin and have aims, theories and methods which have nothing in common with ours. Their basic position is that ordinary people are not capable of understanding socialism and therefore need leaders to tell them what to do. Lenin, the mentor of all these groups, expressed this by saying that, left to themselves, workers were only capable of developing a “trade union consciousness”. Only a minority of people within society, initially mainly from outside of the ranks of the workers, could understand socialism and it was their duty to organise themselves as a “vanguard party” to lead the workers. As this minority had to operate in a hostile capitalist environment it had to organise itself on military-style lines, with its own hierarchically-structured leadership operating in secret and able to hand down “the party line” to the rank-and-file membership.

Socialism is a simple idea. Any person can understand it. Instead of the means for producing things being owned by a privileged class of rich individuals or state or corporate bureaucrats, they should be owned in common and democratically-controlled by everybody; that, instead of goods and services being produced for sale on a market or to make a profit, they should be produced just to satisfy the variety of different needs that people have.

Becoming a socialist means coming to want a society organised on this basis, and to recognise that present-day society, capitalism, because it is a class-divided and profit-motivated society, can never be made to work in the interest of everyone. These are conclusions which people can easily come to on the basis of their own experience and reflection and in the light of hearing the case for socialism argued.

But not only can people understand socialism, they must want it if socialism is to be established. The very nature of socialism as a society of voluntary cooperation and democratic participation rules out its being established by some minority that happens to have got control of political power, whether through elections or through an armed insurrection. People cannot be led into socialism or coerced into it. They cannot be forced into cooperating and participating; this is something they must want to do for themselves and which they must decide to do of their own accord. Socialist society can function on no other basis.

This is the basic principle that underlines the whole political activity of the Socialist Party. It commits us to a policy of making sure that hearing the ease for socialism becomes part of the experience of as many people as possible. It commits us to treating other workers as adults who are capable of being influenced by open public debate and argument and not to try to hoodwink or manipulate them. It commits us to opposing the whole concept of leadership, not just to get socialism but also for the everyday trade-unionist struggle to survive under capitalism.

We do not seek to lead such struggles but limit ourselves to urging workers to organise any particular struggle in a democratic way under the control of those directly involved. Our own party is organised on this basis and we envisage the mass movement for socialism, when it gets off the ground, being organised too on a fully democratic basis without leaders.

Socialism or Capitalism (1962 Glasgow Election Address)

 From the April 1962 issue of the Socialist Standard

Our Glasgow Branch is contesting North Kelvin in the Municipal Elections in May, and we reprint here the Election address of the Party.

To the working men and women of North Kelvin ward

Fellow Workers,

This is the first time that the Socialist Party of Great Britain has contested an election in Glasgow. We shall run in the same manner as our comrades in London. Belfast and Vancouver have done in the past. We believe it is worthwhile for all workers to consider our case very carefully. You will find it unique. The Socialist Party is fundamentally different from all other political parties.

We intend to fight this election on the same platform as we have done in the past, that is, on the straight issue of Socialism or Capitalism. During this campaign you will see no posters or leaflets urging you to vote for our candidate. We shall not indulge in ballyhoo or electioneering stunts. We appeal to your understanding and intelligence, and not to your emotions and prejudices.

Who are the Working Class?

This manifesto is addressed to members of the working class. The Socialist Party is very particular about the accurate use of such words, therefore let us define what we mean when we use this term. By a worker we mean all those men and women who because they own little but their ability to work, must sell this ability for wages or salaries. Whether you be a doctor or a docker, a university professor or a street sweeper. If you have to work in order to live, you are a member of the working class.

Who are tho Capitalist Class?

90 per cent. of Britain's wealth is owned by less than 10 per cent, of the country's population. This group owns the means of producing and distributing wealth (i.e., the factories, the workshops, transport, etc.). Because they own these things they do not have to work for wages and salaries. Their income comes from rent, interest and profit which all comes from the difference between what the working class produces and what they receive in wages and salaries. In other words, the capitalist class live on the unpaid labour of the working class.

Cause of all our problems

In this short address I intend to show the Socialist attitude to such questions as Poverty. Housing, War and Rates. To really get to know the Socialist position I strongly advise you to attend our meetings and read our literature. Basically the position is that all the social problems confronting the worker today are the product of the type of world we live in. We call this society Capitalism, i.e., a society that has a working class producing all the wealth but only receiving back a small proportion of this wealth in wages, and a capitalist class living in ease and plenty on the exploitation of the worker.

Poverty—Its Cause

At every election the reformist politicians promise to abolish the poverty of the worker, but despite these promises we are still poor. We who produce the ocean going luxury yachts, must be content with a day's outing down the Clyde. We who build the mansions and the palaces, must be content with a room and kitchen in North Kelvin. We who toil all week in the factory, office, shipyard and warehouse, must content ourselves with the cheap and the shoddy yet produce all the beautiful articles for our parasitic masters to enjoy. While we have a subject class working for wages and a ruling class living on the workers labour, there will always be poverty despite the sugar coated promises of the politicians.

Housing and you

There is no doubt that in the election addresses you receive from our opponents, you will find a part dealing with housing. Rosy promises will be offered in this matter. We ask you to consider this question a little more carefully than in the past. Observe that all our opponents speak of a housing problem. This is rubbish. There is no housing problem. Any worker can have a house tomorrow just by lifting the 'phone. Building firms advertise in every newspaper begging people to buy houses. The only thing that stops a worker from getting a house is his poverty. If you have the money you can have any house you desire. The thousands of workers clamouring for houses are not suffering from a housing problem but a poverty problem. While Capitalism lasts, the worker will always suffer poverty. Don’t be taken in by the politicians' promise of a new house. You can’t live in a promise.

War and the Worker

Inside Capitalism everything is produced for a profit. But to realise a profit, the commodity has to be sold. To sell goods abroad is essential for any Capitalist country. In attempting to beat down competition from other sellers, the various governments threaten and bluster. But when the threats fail they go to war. Wars are fought for economic reasons, for markets, for sources of raw material, for trade routes and military bases. The working class of the world own little but their ability to work. Wars are won by one Capitalist group over another. Remember our opponents supported war in the past and will do so again. Only the Socialist Party has taken the correct working class standpoint on this issue—that is, wars are fought for economic reasons and workers have nothing to gain in fighting their masters’ battles.

The Fraud of Rates

At every municipal election the reformers make a great fuss about rates and local government spending. We state categorically that this has nothing to do with the working class. A rise or fall in the rates would benefit certain sections of the Capitalist class and injure other sections, but basically it would not alter the position of the worker. We would still be as poor no matter the level of the rates. Don’t be taken in by the job hunting would-be-councillors. Rates have nothing to do with you.

Our Opponents

All the political parties claim to be different. The Progressives talk about a new broom sweeping clean. The Labour Party talk about their democratic Socialism, the Social Credit party about their reforms of the monetary system. The Scottish nationalists claim what is needed is home rule. The Liberal, the Communist, the I.L.P., all of them claim to have a solution to your problems. We ask you to examine all their programmes—one thing will strike you forcibly. Despite all their various claims, when you examine them, you will find they have all something in common. All of them think that Capitalism can be reformed in the workers interests. All they ask is your vote and they claim everything will be all right. None of them want to change Capitalism to Socialism. All of them support the continuance of Capitalism.

It may be objected that such parties as the Labour and Communist parties have the interests of the working class at heart. After all, they claim to be Socialist. How true is this claim? The Labour Party have been in power in Glasgow for many years. They were in power for six years since the war. Has this fundamentally altered your position as workers? The Labour Party has broken strikes, supported a wage freeze, conscription and war. Are these working class actions? They say that nationalisation is Socialism, but this is a lie. State control has been introduced and supported by the Conservatives when it suits them; and likewise by the Labour Party. It is just another form or method for running Capitalism. Whether the industry is nationalised or not, you still have workers and Capitalists; exploited and exploiter. The Communist Party's claim to be Socialist is easily refuted by a look at Russia where they form the government. There you have State Capitalism, with a working class and a privileged class. The Russian workers, like workers all over the world, are living in poverty and insecurity.

The Non-Socialist Socialists

Unlike the Labour, Progressive and other reformist organisations we make no promises. The Socialist Party of Great Britain was formed in 1904 with one object: That is, the establishment of Socialism. This can only be brought about by the majority of the working class understanding and desiring Socialism. We make no claim to be leaders, for only when the working class understand what Socialism is, will Capitalism be abolished.

What is Capitalism ?

• A world where the workers produce all the wealth yet live in poverty and insecurity.
• A world that burns wealth to keep up prices while a third of the world starves.
• A world that lives in perpetual fear of war.
• A world where a handful live in ease and affluence on the misery of the majority.
• A world that causes worker to oppose worker in the quest of a living.
• A world where men are dehumanised and degraded for the insatiable greed of capital.

What is Socialism ?

• A world where the means of living will be owned in common.
• A world where everything will be produced for use and not for profit.
• A world where war, crime, unemployment and poverty will be impossible.
• A world where everyone will produce according to their ability and take according to their needs.
• Socialism is a new social system. There will be no owners or non-owners. As everything will be owned in common there will be no money, banks, stock exchanges or insurance companies. Today, perhaps as many as four-fifths are doing work that would be completely useless under Socialism (e.g., ticket collectors, members of the armed forces, bank clerks, etc.). This means they will be able to do productive work for the first time and this should greatly decrease the working day.

We make no promises

Socialism is not a dream. It is a historic development and can become a reality as soon as you, the worker, understand and desire it. The real dreamers today are those who think you can have Capitalism without wars, poverty and unemployment.

As a candidate for the Socialist Party of Great Britain, I do not beg for your vote on any reform. If, in fact, you want some reform of the present social system, then your vote is not for the Socialist Party of Great Britain.

What I stress again and again, is that in order to bring about Socialism the majority must understand it. If you understand and desire Socialism, if you are aware that Capitalism can never operate for the benefit of the working class, then you will be aware that a vote for any of our opponents is a vote for the retention of Capitalism and a vote for the Socialist Party of Great Britain candidate is a vote registering your protest against Capitalism, a vote for Socialism—the new world.

THE CANDIDATE 

OF THE SOCIALIST PARTY OF GREAT BRITAIN.