Capitalism is a society based on competition and conflict so it comes as no suprise to learn that anti-semitic views that seem outdated are being revived by recent events. A YouGov poll showed that 45 per cent of Britons agreed with at least one of four anti semitic statements put to them. 'Some 25 per cent agreed with the idea that "Jews chase money more than other British people" while one in five accepted as true that "Jews' loyalty to Israel makes them less loyal to Britain than other British people". A further 13 per cent said of those surveyed in the poll commissioned by the Campaign Against Anti Semitism (CAA) agreed that 'Jews talk about the Holocaust too much in order to get sympathy'. (Independent, 14 January) All of this nonsense splits workers apart. RD
The Glasgow & Edinburgh Branches Blog. Towards a better understanding of the world, in order to change it.
Thursday, January 15, 2015
Housing Shortage
After World War Two the UK used to build more than 300,000 new homes a year, but recently it's managed about half that. Consequently the country is facing up to a major house building crisis. 'A decade ago, the Barker Review of Housing Supply noted that about 250,000 homes needed to be built every year to prevent spiralling house prices and a shortage of affordable homes. That target has been consistently missed - the closest the UK got was in 2006-07 when 219,000 homes were built. In 2012-13, the UK hit a post-war low of 135,500 homes, much of which was due to the financial crisis.' (BBC News, 13 January)Needless to say the main sufferers of this housing shortage are once again the working class. RD
Looking Forward
Growing numbers of people are concerned about the state of
the world and the fate of the planet. Do things have to be this way? No, there
is a real world alternative: socialism. Granted none of us will live to see
Socialism, and like millions before us we will probably die without seeing that
really better world we long and struggle for. The vision of a socialist Utopia
was around long before Marx and continues to this day, although today it exists
only by a thread. We all know that Marx founded “scientific socialism” in order
to replace “Utopian socialism”, but as a matter of fact, he had some pretty
complimentary things to say about Owen, Fourier and Co. We all know that for
Marx the foundation of socialism was not the counterposing to the real of an
imaginary Utopia, but rather a critique of existing social conditions. This is
the great contribution that Marx made to the world. There are people hungering
for an alternative to this system. We are bombarded with the idea that there is
no alternative, that capitalism is the natural order of things. We are told
that as much as capitalism has problems, any attempts to get rid of it will
make things far worse.
We live in a world in which 35,000 children die each and
every day of malnutrition and preventable disease. We live in a world system in
which the three richest Americans control assets exceeding the combined gross
domestic product of the 40 poorest countries in the world. We live on a planet
whose ecosystems is threatened by the blind workings of an economic system that
takes profit as its measure and motor of development. The question is: Do we
have to live this way? Can you really radically change things? But it is a
problem if people think they have a basis for an opinion about the desirability
or viability of socialism, first you need to know what it is. Imagine a society
where people consciously learn about and transform the world...where people are
no longer imprisoned by the chains of tradition and ignorance...where people
not only cooperatively work to produce the necessities of life, but get into
art and culture and science—and have fun doing it...where the scientific
outlook and the flight of imagination strengthen and inspire each other...where
there is unity and diversity, far-ranging debate, and ideological struggle over
the direction and development of society—but no longer stamped by social
antagonism...where people interact with each other based on mutual respect,
concern, and love for humanity. A world that cares about and takes care of the
environment. That is socialism.
Socialism is a worldwide society and a community of freely
associating human beings — and it is yet to be achieved—in which all classes
and class distinctions have been overcome; all systems and relations of
exploitation abolished; all oppressive social institutions and relations of
social inequality, like racial discrimination and the domination of women by
men, put an end to; and oppressive and backward ideas and values cast off. Socialism
is a world of abundance, where people together hold all of society's resources
in common. Socialism is not some sort of wishful and airy dream or utopia. The
productive forces of society—not just machinery, equipment, and technology but
also people and their knowledge—have developed to a level that can allow
humanity to overcome scarcity, to provide for people's basic material needs,
and beyond that to have a large surplus left over to devote to the all-around
and future development of society. The productive forces of society are highly
socialized. They require thousands and ultimately millions working together to
mass-produce the things—whether we are talking about clothing or computers—that
are used by people throughout society. And these productive forces are highly interconnected
on an international level: raw materials and transistors and machine tools
produced in one part of the world enter into the production process in other
parts of the world. But these socialized productive forces are privately
controlled. A capitalist class of owners appropriates the results of production
as private, capitalist property. This is the fundamental problem in the world.
And this is what socialism solves. People are unleashed to run and transform
society. This is a society in which you want and need. People must feel that
they have room to disagree with those in authority. And socialist society must
make available the resources and outlets, so people can express these views.
Socialist society is organized to achieve the goal of abolishing all classes
and class distinctions; overcoming all systems and relations of exploitation;
overcoming all oppressive social institutions and relations enabling people to
cast off all oppressive and enslaving ideas and values.
We should not assume that such a future socialist society
would be without conflicts between people or without problems. Socialism don’t
make all problems disappear and create a perfect world; they only solve those
problems which stem from class-based society and specifically, capitalism.
Mankind already faces many challenges which are not a direct result of
capitalism, yet cannot be solved because of capitalism’s peculiarities.
Socialism does not automatically solve these issues, but rather it merely
removes the barriers to solving them. There are some who wish to sell the
workers an ideal Utopia. The Keynesians believe free-market principles plus
prudent government intervention and regulation will simultaneously delivering
hefty profits to the capitalist class and social welfare benefits to the
poorest. While others of the more right-wing “libertarian” variety promise that
the elimination of virtually all government interference with the market will
lead to widespread prosperity, an idea which is not much more ludicrous than
the previous. The more progressive of the dreamers offer us future communities
based on state ownership, both national and municipal, plus cooperatives and
worker-owned enterprises , with little explanations as to how they will be
achieved and with few ideas of how to put such into practice that can put a
dent in capitalist global domination.
We must dream socialist dreams. It’s the dreams of the
future that give us the strength to fight in the present. The goal of socialism
and of the struggle of the working class is freedom. Freedom from hunger and
poverty, freedom endless toil, from exploitation, freedom from war, from racism
and sexism, freedom to live without the supervision of the state - these are
the freedoms.
The purpose of production in socialism is to produce
products to meet the needs of the people. Thus, socialism represents a
fundamental change in the capitalist relations of production: it is the
opposite of capitalism which exists to make profits for the few. State
ownership simply means that the state has effective control over the means of
production and in no way implies a change in the relations of production. Marx
distinguished judicial change of ownership from real change in the relations of
production. He cared little of who actually had the property deeds to an
enterprise which was merely the legal aspect, not the real form. There is also
a myth that in the capitalist countries there is a "free enterprise
system" which solely relies on the market mechanism to function. Planning
is not the opposite of market, the two complement each other in a capitalist
system. State participation in economic planning is extensive. Government
intervention either through ownership or planning, cannot, however, change the
fundamental nature of capitalism. Many reformists have the wishful thinking
that the state can play a major role in altering the purpose of production from
capital accumulation to meeting the needs of the people. They fail to realise
that capital accumulation is fundamental to the capitalist system; it cannot be
altered at will. Instead, the state plays an important role in facilitating the
accumulation of capital.
Wednesday, January 14, 2015
Health Threat
A charity is warning that poor diabetes care in England is leading to avoidable deaths, record rates of complications and huge costs to the NHS, . 'Diabetes UK says the disease is the fastest growing health threat of our times and current care models are not working to get on top of the problem. The NHS spends a tenth of its budget on diabetes, but most goes on managing complications not preventing them. Diabetes is a chronic condition and, if poorly managed, can lead to devastating complications, including blindness, amputations, kidney failure, stroke and early death. (BBC News, 14 January) Another example of the ruthless disregard for the health of the workers. RD
Terminally Ill Left To Die
A NHS report disclosed that 57 patients died after their calls were downgraded after a decision to not to send terminally ill ambulances. 'More than 50 patients have died after an NHS trust introduced a secret policy to downgrade 999 calls and not send ambulances to terminally ill patients. managers at East of England ambulances were accused of "the most cruel form of rationing imaginable" after admitting that 8,000 patients had been affected by the changes.' (Daily Telegraph, 13 January) This callous treatment is typical of how the working class are treated. RD
Coalition Split
As the general election approaches the Liberal Democrats are distancing themselves from Tory spending plans. According to them these cuts beyond 2017-18 will lead to "Dickensian" public services, the Liberal Democrat chief secretary, Danny Alexander, said in comments exposing coalition splits over public spending and the deficit. 'Alexander said that "as a country we should not be wedded to austerity for austerity's stake", adding that he thought the UK would not support an ideological drive for an ever smaller state." (Guardian, 13 January) The coalition was committed to eliminating the current structural deficit by 2017-18, a target that would require cuts of £30bn, he said, but it would be "grossly unfair" to try to reach that figure by spending reductions alone, with £12bn of those cuts coming from welfare. Despite all the fine words both parties are committed to gigantic welfare cuts. RD
Peering into the Future
.jpg)
What does the socialist
society of tomorrow look like?
Many who advocate a socialist
system are hesitant to talk about what such a society might look like, however,
the discussion on how socialism will work is as old as the workers’ movement.
Marx once said it was not for socialists to describe “the recipes of the
cookshops of the future”, that a future society must emerge from those who are
actually creating socialism and not from a wishful imagination. In general this
aversion to drawing up blueprints has been healthy, in the respect that we
cannot predict the specifics of the revolutionary situation and it is not the business
of socialists at this moment in time to tell those who will be engaged in the
socialist revolution how they should construct their post-revolutionary
economy. We're not going to get a blueprint of socialism from Marx who knew that
something would come after capitalism...
… Yet he did make some predictions
about what it could be like, and those are the very famous pieces of his speculations
about future society that he divided into two phases where the first involved
labour tokens and an accounting system to determine how much workers would get
paid. But they're very small compared to the majority of his work, which is
just about understanding capitalism. What socialists should decline to do is to
lay down detailed instructions for every minutia of daily life in socialism. It
may be difficult to draw up our vision of future society and a degree of
confrontation with differences of opinion. But if we're serious about
revolution, we have to be serious about what we want and how we propose to get
there. The important thing is that a practical alternative is shown. We can easily
alter it on the way taking into account new experiences and the new lessons to
be learned from them.
A socialist economy would for the
first time give people, as producers and users, the chance to control every
step of production, take initiatives and experiment without being strangled by
profit-driven competition. Each productive enterprise is managed by those who
work there. Workers are responsible for the operation of the facility and
organisation of the workplace. Though workers manage the workplace, they do not
own the means of production. These are the collective property of the society.
But it is invariably asked, "Will a self-managed firm do so as well as a
capitalist firm? Are workers sufficiently competent to make complicated
technical and financial decisions? Are they competent even to elect
representatives who will appoint effective managers?" it is strange that
these questions are raised in a world where that prides itself on its
democratic commitment. And which already deems ordinary people sufficiently
competent to select local councils and national governments. We regard ordinary
people capable of selecting representatives who will decide their taxes, who
will make laws which, if violated, consign them to prison, who might even send
them off to kill and die in wars. Should we really ask if ordinary people are
competent to elect their bosses? Nevertheless we can answer the question directly
from actual study. Research from 1973, which concluded: "In no instance of
which we have evidence has a major effort to increase employee participation
resulted in a long-term decline in productivity" (United States Department
of Health, Education and Welfare) A later by Jones and Svejnar (1982) report:
"There is apparently consistent support for the view that worker
participation inmanagement causes higher productivity.” In 1990 Princeton
economist Alan Blinder reaches the same conclusion. Levine and Tyson (1990), in
their analysis of some 43 separate studies, found: “Our overall assessment of
the empirical literature from economics, industrial relations, organizational
behavior and other social sciences is that participation usually leads to
small, short-run improvements in performance, and sometimes leads to
significant longlasting improvements…There is almost never a negative effect…”
Lastly, of course, there is also
the empirical evidence of the continued existence of tens of thousands of
viable co-operatives around the world that demonstrate that worker
self-management is any less competent than their conventional counterparts. Not
even the most pro-capitalist critics of cooperatives argues that worker
incompetence in selecting managers is the problem. It is not so surprising that
worker self-managed enterprises should be efficient since workers' well-being
is tied directly to the financial health of the enterprise, all have an
interest in selecting good managers. Bad supervision is not hard to detect by
those near at hand (who observe at close range the nature of the overseeing and
feel its effects quickly), incompetence will not likely long be tolerated.
Moreover, each individual has an interest in seeing to it that co-workers work
effectively (and not appearing themselves to be slackers), so less supervision
is necessary. The conclusions of Henry Levin (1984) after several years of
field study “There exist both personal and collective incentives in
cooperatives that are likely to lead to higher productivity. The specific
consequences of these incentives are that the workers in cooperatives will tend
to work harder and in a more flexible manner than those in capitalist firms;
they will have a lower turnover rate and absenteeism; and they will take better
care of plant and equipment. In addition, producer cooperatives function with
relatively few unskilled workers and middle managers, experience fewer
bottlenecks in production and have more efficient training programs than do
capitalist firms.” [http://www.luc.edu/faculty/dschwei/economicdemocracy.pdf]
“Our economic system and our planetary system
are now at war,” Naomi Klein writes in her book ‘This Changes Everything’, that
changing our relationship to nature is inseparable from changing our
relationship to each other by transforming our economic system. The immediate
threat to the earth “changes everything” in the sense that just adding “the
environment” to our list of concerns is not good enough. The sheer scale of the
problem necessitates a politics that can take on capitalism. We must do away
with any notions, Klein asserts, that the environmental crisis can be contained
and eventually rolled back through policy tinkering; geo-engineering technical
fixes or through market-based solutions
Klein is critical of the existing environmental and social movements. People
hunker down into a "survival bubble" in the attempt to ride out
economic hardships they face and this weakens social bonds that are essential
to political engagement. Significant numbers abandon reason and are more
susceptible to simplistic populist slogans and political messages based on
falsehoods. Creating a vacuous political environment, and framing issues in the
simplest manner possible, avoiding complexity
becomes the political strategy driving
mainstream election campaigns. Democracy
is not defined as "we" but "me", denying the common welfare
and the public good in preference for the personal advantage and
individualism. The Socialists endeavour
to seek frameworks that reinvigorate democracy for all. There
is the tendency of many in the movement to mistakenly identify structures
themselves as part of the problem. There is no going forward, however, without
the most serious development of institutions that can deal on a mass scale with
resources, coordination, generational continuity, leadership development,
outreach, popular education, and, especially, the accountability structures to
make complex and difficult collective choices and to keep wayward leaders in
check. As Klein writes, “The fetish for structurelessness, the rebellion
against any kind of institutionalization, is not a luxury today’s transformational
movements can afford… Despite endless griping, tweeting, flash mobbing, and
occupying, we collectively lack many of the tools that built and sustained the
transformative movements of the past.” Klein also insists that the struggle
against climate change cannot be won by fear alone. “Fear is a survival
response. It makes us run, it makes us leap, it can make us act superhuman. But
we need somewhere to run to. Without that, the fear is only paralyzing.” Calling
for a more austere lifestyle only reinforces the austerity pushed by capitalist
states. The issue is not just living with “less” but living differently — which
can also mean better. It is about an alternative society. The tactic is to point
to a long series of issues directly linked to the environment — housing,
transportation, infrastructure, meaningful jobs, collective services, public
spaces, greater equality, and a more substantive democracy — and work to
convince people that “climate action is their best hope for a better present,
and a future far more exciting than anything else currently on offer.”
But more importantly to take on capitalism we
must be clear about what this means, to ensure what “anti-capitalism” really means.
For many it is not the capitalist system that is at issue but
particular sub-categories of villains: big business, banks, multi-nationals
corporations. There is no “neoliberal” capitalism, “deregulated” capitalism,
“unfettered” capitalism, “predatory” capitalism, “extractive” capitalism – only
one capitalist system. It is capitalism — not a qualified capitalism that is
the enemy and the concept of a “green” capitalism is an oxymoron. Capitalism
does of course vary across time and place, and some of those are far from trivial.
But in terms of substantial fundamental differences we still have capitalism
that is inseparable from the compulsion to indiscriminate growth, commodification
of labour power and nature and consumerism. A social system based on private
ownership of production can’t support the kind of planning that could avert
environmental catastrophe. The owners of capital are fragmented and compelled
by competition to look after their own interests first, and any serious
planning would have to override property rights — an action that would be
aggressively resisted. Arundhati Roy is quoted as saying: “There’s really no
such thing as the ‘voiceless’. There are only the deliberately silenced, or the
preferably unheard.”
Tuesday, January 13, 2015
Class Room Crisis
Council leaders warn that the cost of creating places for the 880,000 extra pupils expected in England by 2023 could push schools to breaking point, . 'The Local Government Association fears the demand for school places could soon reach a tipping point with no more space or money to extend schools. The LGA wants the government to fully fund the cost of all the extra places, calculated to run to £12bn.' (BBC News, 13 January) Official government figures, published last year, project that by 2023 there will be a total of 8,022,000 pupils in England's schools - up from 7,143,000 in the current academic year. This increase has no budget to deal with the problem. RD
Cuts In Cancer Treatment
Health chiefs have announced that twenty-five different cancer treatments will no longer be funded by the NHS in England, . 'NHS England announced the step after it emerged the £280m Cancer Drugs Fund - for drugs not routinely available - was to go £100m over budget in 2014/15. Some drugs will be removed and others restricted - a move charities say could leave some without crucial treatments.' (BBC News, 12 January) Another example of government cuts coming before essential treatment for the working class. RD
US Military Hacked
A group claiming to back the Islamic State have hacked the Twitter and YouTube accounts of the US military command. 'One message said: "American soldiers, we are coming, watch your back." It was signed by Isis, another name for the Islamic State. Some internal military documents also appeared on the Centcom Twitter feed. Centcom said it was taking "appropriate measures".' (BBC News, 12 January) The Twitter account, which usually provide updates on strikes against IS, was later taken down. If the IS has access to the US military's secrets it is a real cause for concern. RD
The (Sur)realpolitik of Capitalism
People all over the world used to dream and desire things
like solidarity, beauty, love, justice for all, equality and brotherhood.
Knowledge was supposed to have one and only purpose: to give people the
intellectual tools to build better societies. Now, education is conditioning
with young people crushed under the deadly weight of student debt. Healthcare
little more than a well-remunerated business, with pharmaceutical companies engaged
in plundering instead of curing. People arescared that they might get sick one
day; not because of illness itself, but because they would not be able to pay
their medical bills. Great science is locked up behind the doors of corporate
laboratories as lawyers secure their patents for profits. Instead of advancing
humanity. The best scientific brains are working for the military, or they are
busy developing ‘products' for markets. The Arts has been reduced to mostly
indistinguishable soulless entertainment. Instead of inspiring people to
revolution, instead of making them aim at something higher, artists have been
reduced to the level of cheap providers of pap. Hardly anyone reads. Hardly
anyone thinks. Ideals are being spat on. Nobody seems to be happy. People are
miserably atomized, lonely and lost. Only consumerism, and commercialism are
glorified. There is nothing that encourages people to dream of a much better
world, or to struggle for a new, just and egalitarian society. Instead of
creating beautiful music and poetry, instead of building public parks and
ecological cities, we are choking our urban centers with cars; we are murdering
millions of people over access to natural resources. We live for
over-production and over-consumption, while billions are dying in the gutter.
Most of the people have been made to forget that human beings
are essentially optimistic, sharing and loving creatures. Most people have been
made to forget, or were never allowed to know, that building better societies
is much more glorious and fun than living in some extreme individualistic
nightmare. Living for humanity, not for profit, not for a ‘me-me-me-goes first'
dogma, is fulfilling and actually gives meaning to one's existence. People want
life to have meaning again… and to be full of beauty, of hope and dreams! These
are clear signs of an economic system that no longer plays a productive role
and needs to be replaced. The idea is becoming increasingly popular. It is an
idea whose time has come. With the beginning of 2015 we enter a journey to the
end of the night. The major task for the social movement is to build People
Power together. We build together because our issues are all connected and
unified power is when we are strongest. Global trade agreements, rigged for big
business interests seems distant but it has impacts at the local level, adversely
hurting workers.
We should all engage in this fight because the stakes are
high. We will create the world in which we want to live and one that increases
the chances of a livable future. One truly lives only when he or she is marching forward and aiming at a better world. The priority now is
for humanity to survive – to survive as free people, not as wage-slaves. Let us
unite and shout:
“We Want Our Planet Back!”
That should be the demand on our banners, our battle-cry. Not
everyone is for sale, neither is everyone willing to be a slave.
Monday, January 12, 2015
Troop Mobilisation
TROOP MOBILISATION
In Paris last week France seventeen people were killed in attacks at the satirical magazine Charlie Hebdo, on a police officer, and at a kosher supermarket. So France is mobilising 10,000 troops to boost security after last week's deadly attacks, and will send thousands of police to protect Jewish schools. 'Defence Minister Jean-Yves Le Drian said troops would be in place from Tuesday evening in sensitive areas. It is the first time troops have been deployed within France on such a scale. On Sunday, an estimated 3.7 million people took to the streets to show solidarity with the victims, including 1.5 million people in Paris.' (BBC News, 12 January) RD
Cancelled Operations
The sharp rise in the number of procedures hospitals are at present postponing has prompted the leader of Britain's surgeons to warn that patients affected will suffer "considerable distress". 'Unprecedented demand has led to a third more elective (planned) operations being cancelled in England this winter than last year, latest figures show. A total of 12,345 were called off at short notice between 3 November and 4 January, a rise of 32% on the 9,320 seen in the same period in the winter of 2013-14.' (Observer, 11 January) Cancellations included some 3,771 procedures such as hernia repairs and hip or knee replacements in the three weeks before and during the festive season RD
Is Britain Next?
According to the Sunday Express the elite Special Forces have joined counter-terror police and 1,900 Army personnel in the biggest security operation since the 2012 London Olympics. 'The news comes as Al Qaeda warned that France was only its third preferred target after Britain and the US. Most of the Special Forces will be wearing civilian clothes, while some have donned police uniforms to accompany police officers who visit the homes of persons of interest in response to intelligence leads by MI5.' (Sunday Express, 11 January) The Sunday Express has learned that a 30-strong SAS team, divided into smaller groups, has been allocated to the Police Counter Intelligence Unit by the regiment's inner sanctum, dubbed the Kremlin. RD
Powerless Capitalism
After gale force winds brought down power lines on Friday, almost 10,000 people in the north of Scotland are still without electricity. The worst-affected areas are Inverness-shire, the Western Isles and rural parts of Wick and Dingwall. 'Poor weather over the weekend has hampered efforts to re-connect homes with engineers working in "treacherous and worsening conditions". Trains between Inverness and Perth have had to be replaced by buses. Several ferry services have been cancelled with the disruption expected to last until late on Sunday.' (BBC News, 11 January) Despite political promises capitalism still cannot deal with the usual winter conditions. RD
Success is Socialism
There exists no definition of socialism that is generally
understood and accepted. The dilemma of socialism today is first of all the
dilemma of the meaning of socialism, because the term has been applied to such
an all-encompassing range of persons, parties, philosophies, states, and social
systems, often completely antagonistic to each other, that the very term
‘socialism’ has become virtually meaningless. ‘Socialism’ has become another
name for another form of capitalism. The temptation is strong to abandon the
label entirely, to adopt some new term to indicate the kind of social change we
propose. But to do so would be to attempt to side-step the problem. Since the
main challenge to capitalism has always come from that which called itself
socialism, the intellectual harlots of capitalist ideology empty the word of
all meaning and purpose, denying the very possibility of an alternative to this
system, hoping to bury of all its revolutionary content. We have to take the
word ‘socialism’ back, for without words there can be no concepts, and where
there is no language of freedom, there can be no dream of liberation. We cannot
simply abdicate the terminology of socialism and arbitrarily invent new labels.
To do so would be futile, because any new terms will be similarly sucked dry if
they acquire popular recognition. Words such as ‘socialism’, ‘revolution’,
‘democracy’, and ‘freedom’ do contain within themselves a critique of the
existing order. That critique can be realized only by reconquering it and
giving it new life, not by abandoning it and searching for another. For this
reason, we continue with the term ‘socialism’, but ensuring that we give its
proper meaning so people understand exactly what we mean by it.
Today humanity faces a global crisis stemming from the
incredible rapacity of the capitalist system. There is catastrophic climate
change which threatens to end life on our planet. Socialism offers the best hope for humanity. We
think a society run by people themselves, freed from both bosses and
bureaucrats, would be far more democratic and liberating than capitalism ever
has been. We think that a society
premised upon the enhancement of life rather than the perpetuation of profit
would stand the best chance of putting a halt to the environmental devastation
now ravishing the globe. Socialists often talked about capitalism's
‘contradictions’ but never have they been more painfully in evidence than right
than now. Millions find no work while
manufacturing plants lie idle. Fortunes
are spent on high-tech weapons to bomb homes while homeless people sleep in
doorways. The hungry rummage through garbage bins outside of supermarkets with
well-stocked shelves. People starve while big grain corporations hoard their
surpluses in their storehouses. White-collar criminals in the banking and
finance industry are rewarded with huge bonuses. Agri-business pushes millions
of small farmers and peasants off the land, destroys life-sustaining topsoil,
creates vegetables without taste or nutritional value, and sprays farmworkers
with carcinogenic pesticides. The result is system ruled by insanity, obsessed
with acquisition and accumulation that it will leave the planet a wasteland. It
may be hard to believe, but there is a method to this madness: it lies in the
basic dynamics of capitalist society, which is organised for profit above all
else.
Socialists use the term ‘social revolution’ in a very
precise way. Whereas reforms are changes within an existing social and economic
system, social revolutions make a sharp break from one social system to
another. A socialist revolution would end the private ownership of the
factories, mines, transportation and offices by a tiny clique of capitalists. Some
politicians imagine that changing the tax code or campaigning for finance
reforms will fix the ill of the social system.
But the cause is much deeper than bad policy or poor decisions, and will
not be solved by tinkering around the edges. Nor is the problem an evil plot,
as some on both left and right have alleged.
Powerful people frequently benefit from social inequality, economic
waste and ecological degradation, but under capitalism such things happen
whether or not anyone plans them. At
fault is not a calculating conspiracy but the very driving force of capitalism:
the relentless pursuit of private profit. Capitalism is a generalized regime of
commodity production characterised by market exchange, including the purchase
and sale of labor power. Production
under capitalism is organised for private profit, which is extracted from
workers' labor and realised in the sale of goods at the highest allowable
price. This system of social and property relations works to benefit a ruling
class made up of owners, financiers, merchants and executives who control key
institutions of production and exchange: banks, insurance companies, stock
exchanges, service concerns such as airlines and trucking, extractive
industries such as coal and oil, and manufacturers and distributors of
commodities like cars, computers and toothpaste. This ruling class appropriates the surplus of
the value created by the working class - the majority of us, whose living comes
not from owning capital but from working for those who do. By virtue of its
dominant social position the ruling class has a common and basic interest in
defending private property and maximising profit rates. But it is not a giant conspiracy. Sometimes
real differences emerge in its ranks.
Sectors of capital clash over appropriate measures for the maintenance
of profit rates, and they enter into political contest by underwriting
different candidates in elections and lobbying for different public policy
measures. Precisely through the open
expression of such differences, consensus is established within the dominant
class. The capitalists may feel the effects of crises and competition but as a
class, capitalists continue to do well and they rarely suffer like those of us
at the bottom of society.
Although to many people the prospect of a revived socialist
movement seems but a pipe dream, capitalism is showing its impracticality and
obsolescence in a host of ways. A rebirth of socialism is possible, just as
periods of calm in the past have been interrupted by resurgences of radicalism
and militancy. Many reservations that people hold about socialism are the
result of a perfectly reasonable revulsion against the monstrosities which have
masquerades as ‘socialism’. Around the world, countries ruled by single parties
and dictatorial autocrats draped themselves with the trappings of Marx, minuscule
groups announced themselves ‘the vanguard’ of the working class with some supposedly standing for equality,
worshipping authoritarian leaders and stifling democratic norms under the name
‘democratic centralism’. Socialism is a vision of a new world, based on one
central conviction: that human beings can construct a society without
exploitation and oppression through, and only through, the maximum extension of
democratic control. The emancipation of humanity from capitalism will only come
about when workers act in the offices, factories and streets on their own
behalf. It cannot be achieved through any shortcut, though many have been
tried.
The paradox of reformism is that it's not the way to win
reforms, especially in periods of crisis, when the system's ability to absorb
demands is minimal, substantial social gains can only be won through the
militant collective action of working people and mass movements aiming at the
democratic conquest of social power. The
aim of socialism can be sacrificed at crucial moments to the error of moderation
and gradualism. We don't object to reformism because it advocates reforms, but
because it has such a sorry record for obtaining them. We have no callous desire to ‘bring the system
down’ by letting people starve, as is sometimes attributed to
revolutionaries. On the contrary, we aim
to show people that by organising and struggling, they can win. We try to
generate a common political orientation. The main reason to join a socialist
organisation, of course, is work for socialism. The abolition of class rule and
establishment of workers' democracy will not come about unless there are
socialists organised to push for it. Through debate and analysis, socialists
help one another understand what's happening in the world. We need your
participation, talents and ideas. Join us.
Sunday, January 11, 2015
The Winners Will Become Losers And Vice Versa.
Capitalism is defined by competition and there will always be winners and losers in any transaction that takes place between two parties. The drop in oil prices is a case in point. Firstly, the price has dropped mainly because too much oil has come on stream, largely because the Americans have started exporting shale oil. The Americans did not stop to consider this possibility and could not care a damn about it anyway. They would become self- sufficient and gain valuable export dollars anyway. The Saudis refused to cut back on production believing that the cost of producing shale oil would deter its continued and growing production. In Canada, the oil producing provinces such as Alberta and Newfoundland are feeling the economic pinch, but Ontario comes out a winner. Oil for transportation and industry will be cheaper and the resulting lower dollar is good for exporters. Not too far in the future the tide will turn and winners will become losers and vice versa. Makes a lot of sense, right? John Ayers.
2000 Avoidable Deaths
Air pollution in Scotland's towns and cities has created a public health crisis, according to environmental campaigners. The claim by Friends of the Earth Scotland came after an analysis of official data for two toxic pollutants. The group said the figures showed pollution levels were continuing to break Scottish and European limits. 'Air pollution in Scotland's towns and cities is creating a public health crisis, according to environmental campaigners. High levels of NO2 are linked to asthma and other respiratory problems.......Last April, Health Protection Scotland (HPS) said air pollution may have been responsible for 2,000 deaths in Scotland in a single year.' (BBC News, 11 January) Inside capitalism business is much more important than pollution. RD
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
-
Paternalism is a common attitude among well-meaning social reformers. Stemming from the root pater, or father, paternalism implies a patria...
