Friday, January 16, 2015

More Prejudice

There has been an increase of 20 per cent in the past year of Jews emigrating to Israel because of antisemitic attacks and other incidents. 'The Jewish Agency said that there were 620 immigrants from Britain last year compared with 320 in 2013. This coincided with an increase by  by almost 40 per cent of recorded antisemitic incidents in Britain.' (Times, 14 January) Capitalism breeds hatred and prejudice and the main sufferers are always the workers. RD

Capitalism Must End


Today we are faced with multiple interrelated crises, for example the threat of catastrophic climate change or equally catastrophic thermonuclear war, and the threat of widespread famine. These threats to human existence and to the biosphere demand a prompt and rational response; but we are failing to take the steps that are necessary to avoid disaster.

A serious weakness among activists in movements for social change has been a lack of understanding of the true nature of the system they live under. Instead of naming capitalism as the problem activists often use vague populist terms like “the 1%,” “the rich,” “banksters,” or “greedy corporations.” But the problem runs much deeper than the corruption of any particular individual or institution. It lies in the structural foundation of the entire way of life that currently dominates the globe. This is an integral part of Socialist Party’s function; to educate people on the complex and long history of capitalism. We need to understand how it works and what the nature of the crisis is and the nature of the different moments that it passes through so that we can identify its vulnerabilities and weaknesses. We ask ‘What’s the labor theory of value?’ and say of those militant protesters ‘How can you call yourself a socialist if you don’t even know what the labor theory of value is, one of its basic concepts?”  The labor theory of value means that the exchange value of a product is based on the socially necessary amount of labor power that is generally required to produce it. But under capitalism, one of the key ingredients is surplus value. And under capitalism, the buyer of labor power — the capitalist — appropriates the surplus value generated in the process of commodity production. But theoretical clarity for its own sake is pointless intellectualism; instead, it should be a guide for action. Mastering Marxist political economy is tough enough. But putting it into action is even harder.

One increasingly urgent reason to abolish capitalism is its prominent role in harming the planet. Capitalism possesses an inherent growth imperative. This means that the normal functioning of capitalism is causing water shortages, polluted oceans, destroyed forests and ruined depleted topsoil. But even if the pending ecological catastrophe weren’t upon us, capitalism would still need to be dismantled because it’s based on exploitation. There’s no reason why the social result of production needs to be in private hands and that only a few people should own what everybody produces.

Critiques of capitalism have entered the mainstream debates, with Thomas Piketty’s Capital in the Twenty-First Century and Naomi Klein’s This Changes Everything: Capitalism vs. the Climate as notable examples. Both authors, however, approach capitalism from a reformist stance and hold up social democratic versions of capitalism as viable alternatives. For sure, it is worth defending the social safety nets and more enlightened views on environmental issues. But it has to be kept emphasized that capitalism, in whatever form, is inherently destructive because it converts the natural world into commodities. And it’s inherently exploitative because profit always comes from the exploitation of workers. It doesn’t matter if you give them healthcare or a higher salary; you’re still exploiting them for private gain.

The problem with Piketty and Klein is that regardless of intention are complicit in promoting the supremacy of capitalism which remains unchallenged questioned.  They no matter how reluctantly only offer a framework that exists within the system. Their debate has to be inside that framework. Nothing can exist outside. It is not unlike when Thatcher said, ‘There is no alternative. It’s hard for people to imagine that there could be any alternative. People think this is all there is. This is the only way humans can behave. Capitalism is natural. The level of political consciousness within the working class is very low. And that didn’t happen by chance. It is by design and it’s by indoctrination and conditioning. The capitalists and their representatives in government are adept at finding new ways to squash and tamp down threats to their control. So the socialist movement has to keep evolving our tactics as well. The Occupy movement provided a glimpse at what’s possible. It made people realize they can rise up and take collective action. It was very inspiring to people for that reason. It made people feel good that they weren’t alone and it showed the potential of what could happen. But Occupy also was a learning experience. It expressed the discontent, it showed the weakness and the need to be stronger. But if we’re actually going to go up against the system, it can’t just be a spontaneous gathering of a bunch of people. It has to be organized — planned and strategic.

Many are pessimistic about the prospect of a socialist revolution, probably with a certain amount of justification, and they know that eradicating capitalism is a long shot. But it’s our only shot. The reason that socialists are politically active is because there’s nothing else. The only other alternative is to give up, surrender and submit to a slow death for ourselves and our planet.  When we accept things the way they are we’ll end up in a worse situation. If a person really understands what’s going on, he or she cannot stand idle. It’s a matter of human dignity and it becomes part of our historical social responsibility to try and change things. Accepting things the way they are would mean allowing 10 million children under the age of five to die annually because, under the normal functioning of global capitalism, it’s not profitable to save them. It would mean continuing to accept racism, which has always been central to capitalism’s divide and rule manner of domination and control. It means the acceptance of capitalism’s expansion and the unremitting accumulation of capital.


We should never forget that we are potentially stronger than they. We outnumber them. But equally important, we have right on our side.

Thursday, January 15, 2015

Capitalism Is Unpredictable

All sorts of self-styled experts claim that they can predict how capitalism operates, but recent developments in the North Sea illustrate how wild that boast really is. Energy firms are pulling the plug on billions of pounds worth of investment in the North Sea, as industry leaders prepare to meet ministers to discuss mounting jobs crisis caused by plummeting oil prices. 'In the latest blow for Scotland's oil industry, the Edinburgh-based global consultancy firm Wood Mackenzie said nine projects that had been earmarked as requiring £2 billion of investment over the next two years and had been awaiting final approval could be axed as a direct result of the dramatic decline in global prices over the last six months. (Herald, 14 January) Capitalism's booms and slumps leave the so-called experts clueless. RD

Anti Semitism

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

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

How they own....from your labour


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


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


 Capitalism is fundamentally flawed – obscene built-in inequality with ourselves at the bottom , toiling at mindless, dead-end jobs, while massive corporations full of unfettered greed, propped up by a corrupt governance and hollowed-out democracy, supported by endless propaganda spewed by lickspittle media, undermine what crumbling the social fabric remains. Even where working-class have achieved some victories, capitalists lie in wait always keen to reverse these and turn back the clock. Capitalism is increasingly incompatible with democracy and now possibly human existence. As socialists we understand that socialism to be a system where the vast wealth of society is controlled democratically and put to constructive collective purposes; it is not controlled by a narrow sliver of society to do with as suits them. Marx’s assessment of capitalism's fatal flaw applies today more than ever: The problem with capitalism is ultimately that it radically increases the productive capacity of society but it keeps control over the wealth in the hands of profit-driven individuals and firms, who control how this potential will be developed to suit their own interests. So it is that the productivity of the average worker is many times greater today than it was 50 years ago. But that increase in productivity has not translated into higher living standards or a shorter working week. Instead we see living standards in decline, inequality mushrooming and infrastructure in varying states of collapse, while there is a record number of billionaires.

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

The National


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