Not for “OUR” People but for “THE” People

“The Socialist League therefore aims at the realisation of complete Revolutionary Socialism, and well knows that this can never happen in any one country without the help of the workers of all civilisation. For us neither geographical boundaries, political history, race, nor creed makes rivals or enemies; for us there are no nations, but only varied masses of workers and friends, whose mutual sympathies are checked or perverted by groups of masters and fleecers whose interest it is to stir up rivalries and hatreds between the dwellers in different lands.” - The Manifesto of the Socialist League, Commonweal, February 1885

When humanity has truly grown up, it will look back on the division of the world into states, and the restriction of the right of humans to travel, live, and work where they wish, as a kind of world apartheid. We will wonder how we ever felt it was justified, or even meaningful, to speak of a human being's statehood. We will understand, of course, the material history and the social causes which lay behind states, in the same way that we understand the history of apartheid itself, or slavery, or the treatment of women as property or 'chattel'. But intellectual understanding does not educate the imagination, and we will wonder how we ever managed to escape awareness of the obvious fact that there is but one, common humanity, and that all rights spring from it alone, and not accidents of race, sex, or geography. States are pens into which humanity is divided for the purpose of being ruled over and exploited by minorities. They exist to limit human freedom: money and goods travel the world freely, while humans are kept in check by passports and border controls.

If socialists oppose the state, how much more should they oppose the nation-state. It is bad enough that people should be penned by the world's rulers like cattle owned by farmers. It is worse that such states should attempt to exclude those of the wrong 'people' or ‘race’. In attempting to harness the power of struggles for the socialist cause, some have dragged our movement into the mud of nationalism. The right of self-determination is not national, but the right of every individual, and of all humanity. It includes to right to determine where to live and work, regardless of states, or borders, or 'nationality'. Humanity's freedom will not be won by building new states, but by destroying them all.

We already have a one-world culture. Information flows around the world. We reach a consensus on different issues through this very rapid, decentralized information flow.  So already governments are less important. The Web has little concept of national boundaries.

We cannot trust the capitalist system to be run in the interest of workers. Everything we win in the course of class struggle can be taken away again if we let down our guard. The only way to keep hold of the gains we make is to get rid of the capitalist system and establish socialism. A lack of local powers is not an argument for nationalism; it is an argument for socialism.

Our task as socialists is to try to provide clarity on the class basis for taking a position. And our position must always be based on what is going to be in the interests of the working class movement. We socialists want to show workers that their interests lie in the maximum unity of all workers against all oppressors. We want them to identify their interests with the oppressed everywhere, to discard the blood-stained Saltire along with the blood-stained Union Jack. But we will not do that without understanding clearly who are our friends and who are our enemies. Our job is to propagate a class-conscious understanding in order to help workers discard harmful popular prejudices. If we don’t do that, then there’s really not much point to our existence, since it is only through discarding the beliefs that keep us shackled to capitalist ideas that we will be able to build a movement capable of building socialism.

The fact that good, well-meaning people have been misled must not prevent us from seeking truth from facts. The fact that left-nationalists Scots wish to see British capitalism weakened, and hope that by voting for independence they will achieve this aim, does not prove that that is what will actually happen. In Scotland nationalism gives workers a scapegoat for the ills of capitalist society. “Don’t blame capitalism, blame the immigrants!” say the UKIP to angry and disillusioned workers in England. And in Scotland the refrain is “Don’t blame capitalism, blame the English!” That people are in the mood to fall for this misdirection is a sign that they understand that something is wrong and that something must be done. They have understood that this society is not serving them but they still have not recognized the true “Auld Enemy” – capitalism – as the cause of their woes.

Technology has increases productive power and efficiency. This means we continually do more for less, thus we will approach a point where ultra-efficient automation entails an extreme abundance of resources, thus everything will be free, nobody will need to work. This situation is called “post-scarcity”. Governments only exist to manage scarcity, they manage the social dysfunction arising from scarcity, thus via eliminating scarcity you eliminate all governments. All need for oppression becomes obsolete when scarcity is vanquished thus dictators will not arise. This is the bigger picture beyond the parochial concerns of borders on Earth.

Realistic Utopia

A serious critique of capitalism is essential to help solve the current world environmental crisis. Important questions are being raised about the dire state of the Earth’s ecosystems. We must now rethink our vision of a future society. We need to have a global perspective, understanding revolution and revolutionary transformation as a world process. Ecological issues must fundamentally be dealt with on a world scale. But that can only happen on the basis of a social and economic system—socialism—that does not treat the environment simply as a means by which to accumulate wealth. The world doesn’t need to go green to save the planet and the people on it, it needs to go red. The only solution is to get rid of capitalism.

Socialism presents a criticism of the god, Mammon, its high priests of finance and those lords of the universe, the industrialists, who worship the market at the sacred altar of money, and like a god, claim omnipotence that they can do anything. Socialism, disputes such a premise and argues that the market is unable to solve everything and that the world cannot live only for consumption and ever more consumption, as the "god-capitalism" always decrees it to be so. Who has eyes to see knows that there is a contradiction and conflict between capital and nature.  Ecological socialism (eco-socialism) denies the divinity of the market. 

Capitalism cannot deal with the environment in a sustainable rational way. Its logic is “expand-or-die”, limitless growth, to cheapen cost and to expand in order to wage the competitive battle and gain market share. And unplanned, large-scale, globally-interconnected production poses grave threats to the environment. Zero growth is not possible in a capitalist economy. Firms compete to make profit. Those who make the most profit can reinvest in capital and with more efficient machinery they out compete other firms. Firms have to make profit to survive. It’s not a case of wicked capitalists but instead a system with a built in growth imperative. Capitalism without growth is capitalism in crisis. Capitalism tend to be based on the short term. They seek to maximise returns quickly. They don’t think about the consequences in 10, 20, 30 years. Capitalist production is by its nature broken up into competing units of capitalist control and ownership over the means of production. And each unit is fundamentally concerned with itself and its expansion and its profit. The economy, the constructed and natural environment, and society cannot be dealt with as a social whole under capitalism. It’s all fragmented and each part looks at what lies outside itself as a “free ride.” An individual capitalist can open a steel mill and be concerned with the cost of that steel mill. But what they do to the air is not “their cost,” because it’s not part of their sphere of ownership. In mainstream economic theory, this is called “externality.” Socialism is not guided by profit but by social need, achieving rational balances between industry and agriculture, reducing gaps between town and country, factoring in the short-run, medium-term, and long-term, etc. And socialist planning is able to take into account non-economic factors: like health, the environment, alienation that people may experience from jobs. Society itself, and not a small oligarchy of property-owners—nor an elite of state techno-crats will be able to decide, democratically, what will be produced and in what way and in what quantities and they will be free to choose how much of the natural and social resources are to be devoted to education, health, or culture. Far from being “despotic,” planning is the exercise by a whole society of its freedom. A significant increase in free time is a condition for the democratic participation of working people in democratic discussion and management of the economy and of society. Human labour force itself is a natural resource. "The natural force of people" and "the natural force of the earth" are "the only two sources of wealth" and those are plundered by capitalism. A number of environmentalists don’t like to use the “c” word for risk of offence, but it’s all about “capitalism”.

The ecological socialist utopia is only a possibility, not inevitable. One cannot predict the future, except in conditional terms. In the absence of a socialist transformation the logic of capitalism will lead the planet to dramatic ecological disasters, threatening the health and the life of billions of human beings, and perhaps even the survival of our species. There is no reason for optimism.  Rosa Luxemburg could reasonably assume that the alternative to socialism would be barbarism. The ecological crisis has made barbarism even more probable. The entrenched ruling class is incredibly powerful, and the forces of radical opposition are still small. But socialism is the only hope that the catastrophic course of capitalist “growth” will be halted. Socialism is pragmatic, not utopian. The society we want to build must reverse the growth imperative and system of private and government ownership, make work life-affirmative, and create an economy based on community, cooperation, sharing, and a system of production that takes into account our impact on ecological systems. It should contribute to the betterment of society while allowing each individual to develop to their full potential. Technology will inevitably be part of our solution, but we must use and re-focus science and technology to serve the priorities of people and nature.

The language of life and death, of apocalyptic cataclysm is not poetic rhetoric — it is the reality of cancer from polluted waters, of choking asthma attacks from poisoned air. Climate change is no longer a future consequence. It is now an actuality. This is capitalism in all its naked brutality— willing to destroy everything for profits. This should not only cause us to despair but rather should motivate all of us to join the struggle to solve the ecological crisis in the only way it can ultimately be resolved — through the revolutionary transformation of our society. Our self-interest in preserving and regenerating healthy eco-systems, living and working in a way that does not compromise ourwell-being, will become central in making decisions about how food is grown and all other aspects of getting our basic needs met. When and where possible we should develop infrastructures for local food, water, and energy sovereignty, recognising that we will need an intricate balance between local production and a more centralised distribution and reallocation of resources. There are decisions that cannot be made on local or regional levels since their consequences obey no borders and affect other regions and, potentially, the entire planet; somehow, we must make these decisions globally. Those who live downstream must be as much involved in decision making as those upstream.

We must uphold the banner of socialism if we are to transform society and fight for all of humanity and for the planet that is our home. 

Why Political Action?

Part of the Socialist Party of Great Britain's argument is that by endeavouring to go through parliament and capturing the state machine which includes the armed forces the likelihood of bloodshed is minimalised. The state controls every part of the armed forces, from the policeman’s truncheon to the nuclear bomb. So long as the capitalist class is allowed to remain in control of the military, there would be no chance of dispossessing the capitalists, or abolishing their system. The primary objective of a revolutionary working class entails gaining control of the armed forces.

There is no possibility of the workers successfully engaging the capitalist class in violence. If the capitalist means of co-ercion was solely the police, then, we could organise workers’ battalions such as the Irish Citizens Army. But the tremendous nature of military force in society today preclude the possibility of prevailing. So capitalists has the supreme weapon - political power and with it, control of the army, navy, air and police forces and that power is conferred upon the representatives of the capitalist class by elections and that is why they invest such large amounts of wealth and much time and effort to win them .

The SPGB are not pacifists. We considered violence a possibility but we argue that the more workers understand and the more educated they become in socialist ideas, the less chance there would be of violence. Historically the battle of ideas has been waged both in the mind (in debates and discussions) and on the streets. The SPGB favour the first approach, and do all we can to keep activity there. Street fighting can only firstly divide us and secondly weaken us. Authoritarian parties such as the old Communist Party denigrate and suppress their opposition so as not to compete by demonstrating the relative values of their ideas. This is where street-fighting plays its negative role: physically removing opposition that one cannot overcome in a battle of hearts and minds. The revolution is aborted in the process, not defended. This is another reason why a socialist revolution must be peaceful. Revolutionary violence is a sign of weakness in the working class.

Our assumption in the SPGB is that significant numbers of capitalists will see the futility of resisting a well-educated, well-organised working-class majority. The capitalist class cannot continue its rule even through violence when enough workers decide to break with the capitalists’ legitimacy and the capitalist system. The position of the SPGB is that the control of the state neutralises the threat of a recalcitrant capitalist class thwarting the will of a class conscious majority, which is the precondition of establishing socialism .The SPGB reject ALL forms of minority action to attempt to establish socialism, which can only be established by the working class when the majority have come to want and understand it. Without a socialist working class, there can be no socialism. The establishment of socialism can only be the conscious majority, and therefore democratic, act of a socialist-minded working class. In many of the so-called revolutionary situations in the past that majority did not exist within the working class.

The capitalist class are the dominant class today because they control the State (machinery of government/political power). And they control the State because a majority of the population allow them to, by their everyday attitudes but also voting for pro-capitalist parties at election times, so returning a pro-capitalism majority to Parliament, so ensuring that any government emerging from Parliament will be pro-capitalism. Just as today a pro-capitalism majority in Parliament reflects the fact that the overwhelming majority of the population wants or accepts capitalism, so a socialist majority in Parliament would reflect the fact that a majority outside Parliament wanted socialism. The SPGB argue that control of parliament by representatives of a conscious revolutionary movement will enable the bureaucratic-military apparatus to be dismantled and the oppressive forces of the state to be emasculated, so that socialism may be introduced with the least possible violence and disruption. The SPGB is not pacifist and does not exclude if need be violence but has adopted the Chartist slogan "peacefully if possibly, forcibly if necessary".

The Russian and German Revolutions actually confirm in some ways the views advanced by the SPGB, that BECAUSE of their control of the state, the German SPD could enforce its rule. And of course, it was the control of the state again that permitted the Bolsheviks to assume dictatorial control over Russia through the coercion of the Red Army over the SR/Menshevik/Anarchist opposition.

The position of the SPGB is that the control of the state neutralises the threat of a recalcitrant capitalist class thwarting the will of a class conscious majority, which is the precondition of establishing socialism. The SPGB reject ALL forms of minority action to attempt to establish socialism, which can only be established by the working class when the majority have come to want and understand it. Without a socialist working class, there can be no socialism. The establishment of socialism can only be the conscious majority, and therefore democratic, act of a socialist-minded working class. I think in many of the so-called revolutionary situations in the past that majority did not exist within the working class.

The German SPD prevailed because they indeed had either the active or passive support of most Germans who sought simply a period of respite and recuperation after the war years. Luxemburg understood that the battle for the hearts and minds of the German working class was still to be won and that any insurrection would have been premature. The Sparticist / Revolutionary Shop Stewards Uprising was actually provoked by the Right and certainly not instigated by Luxemburg or Leibnecht. That the Left did what was expected of them demonstrated the political immaturity of the times. Only a majority of socialist-minded workers could have made the revolution in Germany. The bloody defeat showed how violence, especially by a minority, is suicidal against an existing organised state. That Luxemburg was against proposing a revolutionary putsch is on record and what she simply did, was what any honest representative of the working class could do when events actually began - she took the side of the workers against blood-thirsty mercenaries.

The SPGB position is to capture parliament to abolish capitalism as you well know, not to assume political office or to institute a policy of reforms. Therefore, we can agree with Luxemburg when she says:

"Our participation in the elections is necessary not in order to collaborate with the bourgeoisie and its shield-bearers in making laws, but to cast out the bourgeoisie and its shield-bearers from the temple, to storm the fortress of the counter-revolution, and to raise above it the victorious banner of the proletarian revolution. In order to do this, is a majority in the National Assembly necessary? Only those who subscribe to parliamentary cretinism, who would decide the revolution and socialism with parliamentary majorities, believe this. Not the parliamentary majority in the National Assembly, but the proletarian mass outside, in the factories and on the streets, will decide the fate of the National Assembly.... It, the mass, shall decide on the fate and the outcome of the National Assembly. What happens in, what becomes of, the National Assembly depends upon its own revolutionary activity. The greatest importance therefore attaches to the action outside, which must batter furiously at the gates of the counter-revolutionary parliament. But even the elections themselves and the action of the revolutionary representatives of the mass inside parliament must serve the cause of the revolution. To denounce ruthlessly and loudly all the tricks and dodges of the esteemed assembly, to expose its counter-revolutionary work to the masses at every step, to call upon the masses to decide, to intervene – this is the task of the socialists’ participation in the National Assembly."

Again the example of the army in Russian Revolution answers those that argue that soldiers (and state employees in general) due to their indoctrination, would not obey the instructions of a workers' parliament but would still respond to the orders of the capitalists. They claim that they could then be used to put down the revolution and this gives rise to further speculation about the need for workers' militia, by-passing parliament and so on. It is quite illogical to assume that the wave of enthusiasm for socialism which would be sweeping through the working class as a whole would somehow miss out that section which forms the bulk of the armed forces. Our evidence for this is the record of previous revolutions. The success of the bourgeois revolution in Russia in 1917 was guaranteed when the military, which for decades had brutally put down all opposition to the tsar, succumbed to the general revolutionary discontent and refused any longer to protect the old ruling class. If soldiers then took up the slogans of the Bolsheviks, Mensheviks and SRs, how much more likely will they be to accept socialist policies put forward by workers like themselves organised in a mass socialist party?

The vote is merely the legitimate stamp which will allow for the dismantling of the repressive apparatus of the States and the end of bourgeois democracy and the establishment of real democracy. It is the Achilles heel of capitalism and makes a non-violent revolution possible. What matters is a conscious socialist majority outside parliament, ready and organised to take over and run industry and society; electing a socialist majority in parliament is essentially just a reflection of this. It is not parliament that establishes socialism, but the socialist working-class majority outside parliament and they do this, not by their votes, but by their active participating beyond this in the transformation of society. We fully agree with Luxemburg that "Without the conscious will and action of the majority of the proletariat, there can be no socialism."

Of those organisations with agreed positions, the SPGB has perhaps the most thought out argument for maintaining that there is all possibility that socialism can be achieved by little violence. It has been discussed and debated within the SPGB since it began all through the various stands of popular contemporary political currents of the time, from insurrectionists to syndicalism. So far, it has been a matter of the SPGB unfortunately saying "we told you so" and that hurts and gives no satisfaction to most SPGB members. We want to be proved wrong and that somehow there is a shortcut to socialism. But we are a miserable lot of gloom and doom merchants, but again at same time, we are rosy eyed optimists too in our views that the workers are fully capable of eventually understanding socialism and organising for it with the minimum of social disruption and upheaval and chaos, normally associated with revolution.

You and others may not agree with the SPGB case, but it is nevertheless a valid proposition for the working class to choose or reject and it should not be denied to them though omission or by misinterpretation. Our critics say the working class have been rejecting this "proposition" for the past 100 years" It is the case, yet it seems like they too have all shared the same rejection by any measure you choose to use, votes or membership or actual workers activism so lack of success is nothing to crow about in sole regard to the SPGB.

To summarise, the SPGB position is that we deem it as very unlikely that the capitalist class would be capable of resisting socialism violently. But not being soothsayers or determinists , we say that there may indeed be a reaction from the capitalist class and it would be resisted and thus we adopt the slogan "peacefully if possible, forcibly as necessary " and that's been part of the SPGB case since 1904 and the reason we emphasise the importance of capturing political control of the state machinery INCLUDING the armed forces to guarantee the will of the majority over any recalcitrant minority .

Who owns the North Pole part 86

The Arctic Cold War Hots Up 

Canada plans to spend billions of dollars on new patrol ships, polar satellites, transport upgrade, and winter gear for its troops amid rising demands for the Arctic’s riches.

In line with Canadian Prime Minister Stephen Harper’s vow to boost the country’s footprint in the Arctic in a bid to spur its economic growth, the Conservative government has announced a multi-billion dollar budget to purchase everything from naval ships to weather satellites, US-based Defense News reported this week.  According to the report, on top of the shopping list are five new patrol ships for the Royal Canadian Navy, which will be outfitted with Lockheed Martin avionics at a cost of CAN $3.5 billion ($3.4 billion), as well as up to $50 million in technical upgrades for the Air Force’s CC-138 transport aircraft. Canada plans to buy up to 100 all-terrain vehicles at an estimated price tag between $100 million and $249 million. The Arctic spending package will also include up to $49 million spent on new winter apparel, including snowshoes, skis and toboggans.

Several U.S. lawmakers are warning U.S. military leaders about the pace and scope of Russia's Arctic militarization, including the addition new brigades, ships and airfields to the fast-changing region. 

Russian initiatives are making it increasingly difficult for the U.S. to successfully compete in the area as new sea lanes emerge, they say. 

"When you look at what the Russians are doing in the Arctic, it is actually quite impressive --impressive, but disturbing," Sen. Dan Sullivan, R-Ala., told military leaders at a recent Senate Armed Services Committee Navy budget hearing.

"The Russians are looking at adding four new combat brigades in the Arctic as our U.S. Army is thinking at pulling them out of there," he said. "I think that would give Vladimir Putin a lot of joy. They are building 13 new airfields and conducting long-range air patrols off the coast of Alaska."

"That we would even contemplate taking one soldier away from Alaska is lunacy given Putin's recent actions in the Arctic," he said. "Alaska's Army BCTs are the best cold-weather and mountain-hardened BCTs in the country.  The training makes them uniquely valuable to the U.S. Army and their presence in Alaska hopefully ensures that other nations never make us use them."

Experts say the pace of melting ice and rising water temperatures is expected to open more waterways in the region and possibly new sea-routes for commercial shipping, transport, strategic military presence and adventure tourism. The developments carry geopolitical and national-security risks, as well.

Chief of Naval Operations Adm. Jonathan Greenert said the U.S. needs to intensify its preparations for Arctic activity.

"We need to look at it deliberately and understand it," he said. "We need to get industry up there and study the place and find out when it is going to melt. What are the sea lines that will open? Are there territorial disputes? Are there threats? Russia is increasing their military presence which sort of makes sense. Also, how do we survive up there with our ships our aircraft and our people?"

The Navy is researching technologies that will better enable sailors, ships, sensors and weapons to operate in such a harsh environment.

"We have to look at the hardening of our hulls," he said. "It is not just surface ships. It is the aircraft and the undersea domain. I've directed the increase in our activity up there."

The Office of Naval Research has deployed drones underneath the ice to assess the temperature and salt content of the water so as to better predict the pace of melting ice and the opening up of sea routes.

Greenert also said the Navy is increasing joint exercises with Canada and Scandinavian countries in preparation for increased Arctic activity.

Despite these measures, some lawmakers are still not convinced that the U.S. is doing enough to counterbalance Russian military initiatives in the region. Sen. Angus King, I-Maine, expressed concern that the U.S. only operates a handful of ice breaker ships compared to Russia's large fleet of ice breakers.

"We have one heavy duty and one medium-duty Coast Guard ice breakers," he said. "The Russians have 17 ice breakers in the Arctic. If we are talking about innocent passage and trade, ice breakers are the highway builders and that is an example of how we are really not adequately developing our strategic interests in that region."

Sullivan also echoed Sen. King's concerns about the small U.S. fleet of ice breakers, adding that the Russians have six new icebreakers in development with five more planned.

The U.S. has more than 1,000 miles of Arctic coastline along its Alaskan border. However, Russia's Northern Sea Route, which parallels the Arctic and Russian border, is by far the largest existing shipping route in the region.

Recognizing that the quickening pace of melting ice and warming water temperatures may open up sea lanes sooner than expected, the Navy last year released an Updated Arctic Road Map, which details the service's preparations for increasing its presence in the region.

The Navy's initial version of the document released in 2009 includes mission analysis and "fleet readiness" details for the environment, including search and rescue, maritime security, C4ISR, cooperation with the U.S. Coast Guard, strategic sealift and strategic deterrence, among other things.

"The Arctic is warming twice as fast as the rest of the globe," the document states. "While significant uncertainty exists in projections for Arctic ice extent, the current scientific consensus indicates the Arctic may experience nearly ice free summers sometime in the 2030s."

An assessment by the Navy's Task Force Climate Change determined the rate of melting has increased since the time of this report. As a result, Navy planners anticipate needing to operate there to a much greater extent by the middle of the 2020s instead of the 2030s.

Although the thinning of the Arctic ice was reported by Navy submarines in the 1990s, there have been considerable changes to the environment since that time, said Robert Freeman, spokesman for the oceanographer of the Navy.

While stressing that budget constraints might limit what preparations are possible, Navy Secretary Ray Mabus also said the service was increasing its exercises and preparations for greater activity in the region.

"As the ice melts in the Arctic our responsibilities go up. It is not just platforms and capabilities -- it is what we are facing," he said. "We not only have less ice but it is freezing in different ways. The ice is forming in different ways that are beginning to be a hazard to navigation. We're upping our exercises and research into the area."

Putin called the Navy's Northern Fleet to full combat readiness in exercises in Russia's Arctic North apparently aimed at dwarfing military drills in neighboring Norway, a NATO member. Norway is currently holding its "Joint Viking" drills involving 5,000 troops and 400 vehicles in Finnmark county, which borders Russia in the resource-rich Arctic circle where both countries are vying for influence. This is an operative exercise with all weapons and branches involved,” said army spokesperson Lt. Col. Aleksander Jankov. “To illustrate the magnitude of this, I can mention that if we put the vehicles one after another on the road it will stretch 6 kilometers.”

Norway said its military drills had been planned before the Ukraine crisis. "However, the current security situation in Europe shows that the exercise is more relevant than ever," Lieutenant General Haga Lunde said in a statement. Russia's drills would include nearly 40,000 servicemen, 41 warships and 15 submarines, RIA reported. 

"New challenges and threats to military security require the armed forces to further boost their military capabilities. Special attention must be paid to newly created strategic formations in the north," Defence Minister Sergei Shoigu said, quoted by RIA news agency.

Russia's biggest new military development in the Arctic is the creation of the Russian Joint Strategic Command North (JSCN), which is built out of the former Northern Fleet. The command, according to Defense News, has a surface fleet and a submarine fleet of about 40 vessels each, although between 40% and 70% of those ships are currently unusable.

According to the Polish Institute of International Affairs, the JSCN won't be an ordinary naval fleet. The command will ultimately feature an air defense division, two Arctic mechanized brigades, a naval infantry brigade, a coastal defense missile system, and the placement of missile regiments in outlying archipelagos in the Arctic Ocean. As part of the air defense regiment, Moscow is moving a total of nine S-400 Triumph air defense missile systems to the coast. The S-400 is a long-range surface-to-air missile system that can engage a variety of targets, including aircraft, drones, and other missiles. Triumph air defense missile systems can strike at targets up to 250 miles away and at a maximum altitude of 18.6 miles.  New infrastructure throughout Russia's remote northern coast will support this military buildup. Formerly abandoned Soviet bases are being reopened and new ports and airstrips will be constructed. Moscow's current plans envision the opening of ten Arctic search-and-rescue stations, 16 deepwater ports, 13 airfields, and ten air-defense radar stations across its Arctic coast. Once completed, this construction will "permit the use of larger and more modern bombers," Mark Galeotti, an NYU professor specializing on Russia, writes for The Moscow Times. "By 2025, the Arctic waters are to be patrolled by a squadron of next-generation stealthy PAK DA bombers." One of the new bases is in Alakurtti in the Murmansk region, just 31 miles away from the Finnish border. Murmansk will soon be the location of over 3,000 ground troops, 39 surface ships, and 35 submarines.

Robert Papp, the U.S. special representative for the Arctic, says he questions reports that Russia has launched a major military buildup in the Arctic. Papp says he’s asking U.S. intelligence agencies to look beyond Russia’s military swagger for a realistic view of its Arctic activity. Papp says Moscow could be adding infrastructure for general use in the north.

“One person can look at what’s going on in terms of what they call ‘military buildup’ and rightfully say they’ve got an awful long border along the Arctic, and if you’re going to have increased maritime traffic you should have search-and-rescue facilities, you should have modern airports and other things — things I’d like to have built in Alaska as maritime traffic increases,” he said.

Army Chief of Staff Ray Odierno spoke yesterday of Russia’s military buildup in the Arctic. 

“We have seen over the last several years an obvious increased interest in the Russians in the Arctic,” Odierno said at a U.S. Senate hearing. “There are clear indications … that they are increasing their presence and building bases so in the future they will be able to increase the presence and have an impact in the Arctic region.”

Last week, the secretary of defense said much the same, and the chairman of the joint chiefs of staff said Russia is activating four new brigades in the Arctic.

Poverty in Scotland is becoming more entrenched

More than half a million Scots, including 100,000 children, have been living in severe poverty, according to the Scottish government. Relative poverty had fallen over the past decade but a greater proportion of those struggling to get by were now facing either severe or extreme poverty. People are classed as being in severe poverty if their household income is less than 50% of the UK average. From 2012-13, when anyone whose household income was below £11,500 would have been classed as living in severe poverty. Extreme poverty is defined as being 40% or less of the UK median annual household income - or less than £9,200 in 2012-13.

A total of 510,000 individuals - or 10% of the population - were living in severe poverty in 2012-13, the report said. This included 330,000 working-age adults, 100,000 children and 80,000 pensioners.

But when housing costs were factored in, the number facing severe poverty increased to 710,000. This included 500,000 who were in extreme poverty after paying their rent or mortgage. A total of 370,000 working-age adults, 90,000 children and 40,000 pensioners were all affected by this.

The report stating: "There have been decreases in real earned income, a rise in insecure employment (including zero hour contracts) and increases in the numbers in low pay. The combination of these factors is likely to increase the numbers living in severe and extreme poverty, and reduce the chances of those in low-paid work to lift their families out of poverty." The report concluded: "In short, poverty is changing; work is no longer a guarantee of a life free of poverty; people in poverty face increasing costs; and those in receipt of benefits and tax credits - which of course includes many in work - are finding their incomes squeezed." More than one in four Scots get paid less than the living wage.

The research also said that "welfare reform is another key factor", adding: "For low-income working families reliant on benefits and tax credits, cuts combined with changes in eligibility have seen household income decrease in 2012-13." It warned that more welfare changes are to come, stating: "The majority of the decrease in welfare expenditure is expected to be in the two years to 2015-16. Continuous, cumulative real-terms cuts in benefit levels are expected, affecting both working households and households not in employment."

The Capitalist Disorder

The world capitalist economy with its unceasing drive for capital accumulation is the most immediate cause of the current ecological crisis. The solution requires replacing the world capitalist system with a socialist society where humanity’s alienation from nature, hence from itself, is overcome with reconciliation and harmony. For any emancipatory movement it is essential to understand the genesis and laws of motion of the world capitalist economy and the existing capitalist culture. Without a radical understanding of what exists it is highly unlikely to transcend it. We live in a far different world than a few decades ago yet the fundamentals have not changed that much. The basic conflicts between the classes, between the oppressed and the oppressors, have not ceased.  The threat of what Marx and Engels saw as 'the common ruin of the contending classes' is already on in the world, a perspective that Rosa Luxemburg summed up in the dictum 'Socialism or barbarism' and modified by Istvan Meszaros to ‘socialism or barbarism, if we are lucky’, in the sense, that the extinction of humankind is now a real possibility which is implicit in the uncontrollable accumulative logic of capitalism. Noam Chomsky has explained it 'At this stage of history, either one of two things is possible.  Either the general population will take control of its own destiny and will concern itself with community interests, guided by values of solidarity, sympathy, and concern for others, or, alternatively, there will be no destiny for anyone to control.'  

We need to change the world so that there can still be a world. Socialism is precisely the change we need. Socialism has now become a question of survival. Human species needs socialism not only to realise its potentials but to continue its existence.

Socialism is a method of common ownership, shared wealth, and collective control that fosters cultural freedom and human emancipation. Socialism provides the material basis for people’s freedom. We should remember that the slogan ‘Liberty, Equality, Fraternity’ has always been a part of the socialist tradition. Revolution remains the unfinished story of our times. Socialism today stands poised, as never before, to be 'the movement of immense majority in the interest of immense majority' as Marx proclaimed in the Communist Manifesto. Socialism may not have succeeded for the time being, but it remains the alternative if humankind would survive and hope for a safe world and life worthy of human beings. Socialism is individualist in that our vision is a society where every individual can be a fully human being, as Marx himself put it, 'the free development of each is the condition for the free development of all'. Engels expressed it as ' humanity's leap from the realm of necessity into the realm of freedom', the end of its 'pre-history' and beginning of 'truly human history'.

Socialism remains on the agenda for as long as capitalism exists. There are no inevitabilities in socialism and no guarantees of victory either; only alternatives for people to choose to aspire to achieve. Capitalism remains, but this, by itself, cannot be seen as an argument for the desirability, or a sign of the progressiveness of the capitalist order, much less as any sort of 'triumph' of capitalism. The system is in the grip of crises which they cannot resolve, which manifest themselves variously in different places as racism, sexism, xenophobia, ethnic or national hatreds, religious fundamentalism and intolerance.  Poverty, unemployment and insecurity-related crimes and associated phenomena -- ill health and suicides, alcoholism and drug addiction, criminal violence, violence against women and child abuse, etc. are on the rise everywhere.  Capitalism is an irrationally organised society that has proved incapable of generating the satisfaction of basic human needs -- decent livelihood, knowledge, solidarity, cooperation with fellow human beings, gratification in work and freedom from toil. The writer, Arundhati Roy, uses an expression, “the ghosts of capitalism," to describe the invisible, discarded people who are deemed surplus to requirements of capital accumulation?

The severe and widespread economic and social problems facing working people today demand a revolutionary solution. For those problems are rooted in the very nature of capitalist society and cannot be solved without uprooting capitalism. Toward that end, the Socialist Party was founded. The capitalist class rules and controls our society today by virtue of its control of the political state. A socialist party is needed for the purpose of challenging, capturing and dismantling the capitalist political state. Such a party is also needed to convince the working-class majority of the need for socialism and to recruit the forces for carrying out the revolution. Socialism is not free education, it is not taxing the rich more, it is not better pay. Free education, high pay, appropriation from the rich are things that would happen in a socialist society. Socialism is democratic control of the entire economy. Every workplace a democratically run cooperative of associated producers. The economy co-ordinated by various federations of these democratically run workplaces. Socialism is not the current state, with more localism. Socialism is an emancipated and free society, full democracy in the economy and the abolition of the ruling class. This is the true idea of socialism, which we must seek to build. Our purpose is not to manage capitalism in order to make it nicer or more ethical. Our goal is to move beyond the capitalism system of economics. If we give up and throw our lot in with the reformist we have lost a historic battle of ideas and any chance of an emancipatory socialism emerging. If we don’t manage to create the attraction on the basis of socialism as a revolutionary and emancipatory it will set back for yet another generation to undergo an environmental crisis that humanity may not survive. The principal task of socialists is to try to restore the credibility of socialism in the consciousness of millions of men and women. We can formulate these in near biblical terms: eliminate hunger, clothe the naked, give a dignified life to everyone, save the lives of those who die for lack of proper medical attention, the elimination of illiteracy, generalise free access and universalise democratic freedoms, human rights, and eliminate repressive violence in all its forms. None of this is dogmatic or utopian. Although people are not ready to fight for socialist revolution, it can raise pertinent questions. What type of food production is possible? With what agrarian techniques? In which places? Which materials can be produced? In which localities on the largest scale? We do not condemn reforms but reject reformism. We should be convinced that people who are struggling for these objectives will not abandon the struggle when reality demonstrates the implications of their answers.

The struggle for socialism is not the dogmatic and sectarian imposition of some pre-established objective on the real movement. The building of socialism is a huge laboratory of new experiences which are still undefined. We must learn from practice. We must take into account the fact that the stakes in the world today are dramatic: it is literally a question of the physical survival of humanity. Hunger, epidemics, the deterioration of the natural environment: all of this is the fundamental reality of capitalist New World Disorder. Socialism can regain its credibility and validity if it is ready to totally identify with the struggle against these threats. We carry out our education for the socialist model that takes into account the experiences in all areas of life. The producers must hold the real decision making power over what they produce and receive of the social product. This power must be exercised in a completely democratic manner. If our practice is consistent with this imperative, socialism will once again become a political force that will be invincible.

A Familiar Tale

When the Honeywell plant closed in Scarborough, 250 people, many of whom had worked there for decades, were unemployed. That was through the early months of last year. Only 18 have found work. Most are chasing jobs that pay about half the $20 an hour, plus benefits, that they earned on the assembly line. An all too familiar tale for far too long – time to act. John Ayers.

The Way Of Capitalism

The way of capitalism – Resilient Technologies of Wassau, Wisconsin, have produced, after five years work, an automobile tire that won't go flat. Great, does that mean savings for all, less social labour expended? Not likely, it was developed for army humvees to transport troops and their necessities for war! John Ayers.

It is Not Enough to Be Anti-Capitalist

 The Socialist Party’s aim is to establish a socialist society worldwide — the self-emancipation of working class of the world. At this period is a time there exists a certain amount of uncertainty about the future of humanity. For a number of people, the present time is one of pessimism and retreat. No longer looking forward, reformist organisations look backwards or sideways. The innumerable groups calling themselves socialists are no longer parties of hope but representatives of “realism”. It is ever more blatantly obvious that this economic system is not working for most of us. And if growing inequality and worsening standards of living were not enough, environmental destruction is taking us to the verge of irreversible and cataclysmic climate change. Time is of the essence yet many describing themselves as eco-socialists place reforms of capitalism at the top of their manifestoes and relegate socialism itself to a point in the far flung future. Let’s not be under any illusions the failure of capitalism as a system of production and distribution to meet human needs in an equitable, democratic and sustainable way. It is vital in this hour to put forward the alternative to capitalism in order to mobilise the majority of ordinary people behind it. The case must be made more than ever that socialism is the most viable alternative and make it our prime objective to bring production under democratic control so that basic human needs for food and accommodation, meaningful work, health and education become the determinants of the economy – not the profits of an elite.

Class politics and class war are not anachronisms, quite the opposite. Increasing numbers of people have “got nothing to lose except their chains”. The function of the Socialist Party right now is to encourage the majority of people to work together; to think and act independently of the ruling class; to be confident in the conviction that real democracy is achievable; that human needs can be met; and that there can be a true spirit of peaceful internationalism free from capitalist rivalry and war. Socialism is the way for this to be achieved, not just because it is morally right, but because it is a superior form of society and economy. The world can’t afford capitalism any longer?

The environmental costs of capitalist expansion are evident in the global warming, holes in the ozone, vanishing tropical forests and coral reefs, overfishing, extinction of species and loss of  diversity, the increasing toxicity of our environment and our food, desertification, shrinking water supplies, lack of clean water, and radioactive contamination, to name but a few problems. It is thought that the mere fact that capitalism has resulted in global warming and climate change there is no reason to assume that we must make a clean break with the system in order to address and overcome this problem but capitalism is incapable of fixing its inherent flaws. First and foremost in this regard is capital’s inherent drive towards accumulation, the incessant pursuit by global investors of ever greater and faster profits such as the high returns from fossil fuels portfolios.

Socialism stands, in contrast, for the suppression of capital and the expansion and deepening of democracy. Socialism implies a break with the greedy, exploitative, dehumanising and destructive short-term logic of capitalism; it envisages a society in which the social, cultural, political and economic life of the community is conducted in the interest of all its members. In this sense it is the very antithesis of a social order geared towards the ceaseless pursuit of profit and expansion. It is an immense task we are faced with today: the need to effect a break with the destructive logic of capitalism and inaugurate a new local and global democracy that can be summed up by an expression of James Connolly that our demand is most moderate, we only wish to want the Earth. The Socialist Party does not believe that a small vanguard can bring about the emancipatory socialism we seek. Only a revolution based on the active involvement of large sections of the population can bring about the change we seek.

The choice still remains socialism or barbarism. For the moment the barbarians of profit are winning. Some may not know what socialism is anymore, but they know what barbarism is for all they need to do is look around. It is difficult to find today any part of the world in which there are no serious social protests. They seem to focus on many different issues, creating the impression that there is no connection between them. But that is a self-deception. Often in the past many of these protests used to be dismissed as “single issue movements” but all together they point to the much deeper problems and contradictions. Socialist ideas are more relevant today than ever before. Many express profound distrust against all political parties. Huge majorities harbour profound disgust of the corporate and political elite. The logic of capitalism is to make profits and reinvest those profits and if it has to, destroy the planet in the process. Profit is king and it is in the interests of the overwhelming majority of people on the planet to overthrow this monarchy of money. Far from the market being our salvation it is an abject failure.

It will be obvious at once that the basic principles of socialist society are diametrically opposite to those of capitalist society in which we live. Socialism stands for social or community property. Capitalism stands for private property. Socialism is a society without classes. Capitalism is divided into classes—the class owning property and the propertyless working class.  We can easily understand, therefore, why the great majority of landlords, employers of labour, financiers and the like are opposed to socialism. Their very existence as the receivers of rent, interest and profit is at stake. They do not merely reject the theory of socialism, but actively and bitterly fight every movement which is in any way associated with the struggle for socialism.

Today we confront the dangers of a mounting and inevitable ecological crisis; the ruthlessness and heartlessness of austerity measures; the spread of poverty and exploitation; the atrocity of wars; the systematic undermining of democracy and erosion of human rights around the world; a justice system that criminalises poverty and whitewashes greed. In the face of such injustice, the Socialist Party does not believe that this system can be reformed. The history of political promises have not been able to modify this trajectory. Only a profound change can do that. That is why we believe it is necessary to overthrow the entire capitalist edifice. It is not enough to be anti-capitalist. For us, socialism is not simply a humane version of capitalism but social transformation. We are not talking about the artificial freedom that allows us to choose between bosses, but a real freedom. Our exploitation based on the accumulation of capital in the hands of a class of exploiters at the expense of the vast majority - the workers - who do not own or control the means of production and forced to sell their capacity to work on the market. It is also capitalism that is responsible for environmental problems, and any solution to these will require an economic transformation that is oriented instead around human well-being and sustainability for the fragile ecological balance for our planet.

System D'?

The Toronto star reports that 297 000 UK firms folded in 2010 – 813 everyday. On the same page it is remarked that Ekaterina Ribolovlev, 22 year-old daughter of Russian billionaire. Dymitri, bought a New York apartment for $88 million – 10 rooms, 6 744 square feet. The differences in human fortunes are truly staggering. Surely there will be a call for the end of this nonsense.
Well, it seems there is one alternative – 'System D', the black market, the lemonade stands, flea market vendors, etc. About 1.8 billion people are counted in this class with an economy as large as that of the US. It's all cash and no taxes. Apparently, System D outperformed the regular economy as the recession hit. John Ayers.

The Social Good We Could Do.

The National Post, the mouthpiece of laissez faire (unfair) capitalism Reported that the capsizing of the Costa Concordia would cost the owners $90 million US not counting the impact on bookings. Shares in the cruise company are down 16% reducing the company's value by $1.09 billion. Wow, the social good we could do with that kind of value! John Ayers.

Marxism explained via a Super-Mario video

The Day is Coming

"Without a vision, the people perish" - Book of Proverbs

“Socialism” has been a word which has been something of an empty container into which a wide variety of conflicting ideas can be poured. So we shall be clear upon our meaning - socialism is based on voluntary co-operation rather than state ownership. Many say socialism is dead. As proof, they point to the failure of the Soviet Union. But in Marx's view undeveloped countries like czarist Russia with a minority working class were in no position to lead what has to be a global change from an interdependent world market to socialism "as the act of the dominant peoples 'all at once' and simultaneously" as he put it in the German Ideology. If anything the Bolshevik failure proved Marx right! Marx envisioned not government control of the means of production but control by the working class and democratic planning not by bureaucrats but "by the associated producers." So Marx's own vision of socialism was not proved a failure by the demise of the USSR because it was not tested. Nevertheless, contrary to Marx’s expectations capitalism is still fully alive. The rich get richer and the poor poorer, we are all pitted against each other, millions are killed each year by poverty, war and environmental degradation. Thus, since capitalism isn't dead, neither is socialism yet. To declare socialism finished before capitalism is over is to surrender without struggle an essential means for opposing capitalism. Working people are positioned by capitalism to see more and can grasp the actions of the rich and their needs creates a strong claim on ownership of the wealth that their labour alone creates. Workers can conceive an alternative to the current status quo. Capitalism is an evil that calls for immediate destruction. It has no purpose beyond the infinite accumulation of capital. We can concede that individual capitalists are not necessarily persons of ill-will. The meanness is in the system to whose reproduction we lend ourselves, capitalists from self-interest, workers from dire necessity. The system is a vicious circle.

Labour and capital though antagonistic, are intimately related. Unless joined to labour, capital produces no value; and labour, lacking control of the means of production, cannot make what it needs to live. The imbalance, then, is: control of the means of production by non-producers. Lacking such control workers must sell their labour power as a commodity to those who have such control, subjecting themselves to the latters' will during the workday. Those controlling the means of production, seeing that they can make more from workers' labour than it costs them, grant workers the temporary access to the means of production they need to reproduce their labour and themselves.

It looks like a fair exchange if we overlook the imbalance. Yet this imbalance is signaled by workers' advance of their labour to capitalists before receiving compensation on payday, rather than the reverse. Once put to work, labour power soon fully compensates the capitalist for its cost to him; but it then keeps on adding value to commodities, unpaid, for the remainder of the workday. Workers may have access to the means of production to make what they need, but on condition that, having done so, they continue working, yielding up without compensation the greatest part of the value their labour produces. Marx's name for this unpaid labour done after workers cover their own labor costs is "surplus labour." Its product, "surplus value," is controlled by capitalists. It is from surplus value that profit and capital itself derives. Workers' own savings will never match the accumulation of capital, which they create, but which the system awards to capitalists, along with huge social power. Individual workers may conceivably become capitalists, but the system's imbalance keeps the working class in subservience.

At the heart of the so-called "free" labour contract is a theft effected under a life-threatening extortion. Coerced into this contract by their need, itself due to their separation from the means of production, workers get paid a mere portion of the value they produce in order to reproduce their labour power, hence their lives. They are paid this portion only if they work unpaid for a larger part of the workday. Should they decline surplus labour they will not be allowed enough access to the means of production to do even the labour needed to live. Trade unions may negotiate compensation only for this latter amount of labour. Surplus value is off limits. Marxists call the ratio of what labour costs capitalists to what it produces for them as surplus value, the rate of exploitation. It is often euphemistically called the rate of productivity. Surplus labour is extracted involuntarily since workers would not willingly hand over control of their earnings to others were they not compelled to do so by their separation from the means of production. This imbalance in capital's reproduction thus allows control of the lion's share of the extorted value to be controlled by the representatives of capital. Under cover of equal exchange, this is an exploitation of humans by other humans that is not made more just by being pervasive and normal in the process of capital accumulation. Chattel slavery was once normal.

It will not do to say capitalists are entitled to profit because of their entrepreneurial insight, managerial skill, innovation, risk-taking, etc. These are not unique to capitalists. Persons with these abilities may extract profit from others' labour only if they also own or control the means of production. Many so endowed who lack such control are excluded from profits. Ownership (or control) not skill or talent is the key. Under capitalism all one needs for full entitlement to luxury is enough ownership of the means of production. Nor is providing capital itself a contribution that merits profits. Phoning one's stock-broker is not a productive activity or contribution. "Providing capital" is indeed widely accepted as a productive contribution, but this assumes such entitlement is just, and provides no proof. In the end it matters little if capital's personifications lack justification for exercising power in its name. They control it (and it them); they give orders in its behalf; the police and courts back them up in a power structure with capital at the top. That is the way it is.

Some advocate the solution to exploitation is the creation of workers’ co-operatives and they are heralded as political radicals although such enterprises have been in existence for centuries. Selling one's labour power always means subjecting oneself to domination. Co-operatives can be labeled "masterless slavery" to adapt a term from Max Weber. The fundamental basis of socialism is at the end of the long chain of exploitation the workers have no alternative but to fight back. It is the working class that acts, not the revolutionary political party independently of the class. It may prepare the ground for that action by education and agitation, try to support and strengthen that action when it arrives, unite the diverse sections of the class. From each according to ability to contribute; to each according to needs. That is the best principle that can guide the life of our society today.

The Socialist Party promotes universal cooperation for the common good. We aim to replace the present capitalist system, with its inherent injustice and inhumanity, by a social system from which the domination and exploitation of one class by another will be eliminated, in which economic planning will supersede chaotic competition, and in which genuine democratic self-government, based upon economic equality will be possible. We do not aim for a society where individuality will be crushed out by a system of regimentation. What we seek is a proper collective organisation of our economic resources such as will make possible a much greater degree of leisure and a much richer individual life for every citizen. Socialism is not freedom for labour, but the freedom from labour and the use of machinery and technology to make it increasingly possible to bring to mankind freedom of life, freedom for artistic and intellectual activity, freedom for leisure and enjoyment. We do not believe in change by violence. The Socialist Party does not rest until it has eradicated capitalism and put fully into operation the establishment of the cooperative commonwealth.

Alienation (video)

Toward the Co-operative Commonwealth

"If you and I must fight each other to exist, we will not love each other very hard," Eugene Debs

Would you help to abolish delinquency, disease and despair from the world? Then abolish poverty which is the cause. Would you abolish poverty? Then assist us in abolishing the wages system, the cause of poverty. Capitalism is to blame. It is the sordid, cankerous ulcer of privation and dissolution; it is the hideous nightmare of despair and gloom that waxes fat on the misery of helpless. To the socialist "the wages system" is a system of slavery, the wage worker being forced by it to sell himself from period to period, for life, in a market glutted with wage workers.  So long as society maintains the present system of wage slavery, there can be no relief. This one escape is through the concerted action of the whole working class. Encourage and assist others in abolishing the wages system by joining the Socialist Party which is distinguished by only having one policy - Abolish Capitalism, NOW! We stand on a platform of no reforms. We denounce this outgrown system as incompetent and corrupt and the source of unspeakable misery and suffering to the whole working class. Why we should put the effort into building something we don't particularly want? We want a free society and not reduce the world to some uniform sameness in the name of equality; or any kind of command soviet style economy. Indeed, we should alter the old motto: “From Each according to their self-defined abilities, to each according to their self-defined Needs.”

The worker, amidst the riches which he or she has created, cannot satisfy his or her smallest necessity. Toil and drudgery in unhealthful work-places saps the vitality of life itself. "Down with the wage system!" That is the fundamental demand of the socialist movement. Cooperative association shall take the place of the wage system with its class rule. There shall be no more exploiter or exploited. Production and distribution of the produce must be regulated in the interest of the whole. We strive for the abolition of the class state, class legislation and class rule.

Although many speak of Britain as "our" country, and millions have died or have been mutilated in defence of what they called "their" country, as a matter of fact Britain does not belong to the whole of the British people, but to a comparative few. How many can point to a particular part of the map of the UK and say "this is mine"? Only a lucky few who have paid off their mortgages while the greatest portion of the country is divided among a few great landlords and landowners. In comparison with Third World nations Britain is spoken of as a wealthy country. Does that mean that its people as a whole are well off? By no means. Some are immensely rich, most get a bare living, a large number are degradingly poor. The land and the factories and the transportation - all the means of producing the nation's wealth - are owned by the capitalist class. Production is carried on not for the purpose of supplying the needs of the people but for the purpose of sale in order to realise a profit. Only those who have something to sell can get a living. Only those who can afford to buy acquire things. This is the capitalist system.  If things were produced for use, nobody would spend time in the manufacture of shoddy goods, jerry-built houses, or adulterated food.

The worker has nothing to sell but his or her labour power that is sold to an employer for so many hours a day for a certain price, that is, wages. Since one cannot separate labour power from one's body it comes to this, that workers actually sells themselves like a slave. We socialists, call it "wage slavery". Wages are determined by what it costs to keep a family. How many do you know who can regularly save out of their wages and be able to put something by for a rainy day. It is now a fact that the average person is not more than two weeks removed from penury.

Workers by their own nature are anti-capitalist due to the capital's nature to extort profits from the labour of the workers. A capitalist will only buy labour if he can make profit out of it. Just compare the value of the goods you turned out in a day when you were in the factory, and what you received for your work. The difference between the two is the employer's profit. Profit is the result of the unpaid labour of the worker. In capitalist England, the workers are continually robbed of the results of their labour. The employing class will compel the worker to work as hard and as long as he or she can, for as little money as possible. In spite of Health and Safety regulations, inhuman sweating still flourishes, whole industries in which absolutely inhuman conditions of work and pay still exist. Even through the efforts of the best organised trade unions wages never rise much higher than the cost of living. And even this is not secure. In the endeavour to produce as cheaply as possible, management continually introduces labour-saving technology, which enables them to produce more goods in less time and reduces the standard of skill required. As a result unemployment is continually on the increase and many a previously skilled worker has lost his or her trade.

The Socialist Party recognises first and foremost that labour and capital are always at odds. Whoever controls the basic means of survival controls society. There is no such thing as democracy or equality without the people having collective control of these means, both on a large scale and on a small scale, in the neighbourhood and the workshop. The way of competition offers only increasing bondage, while the way of cooperation offers real freedom. What does capitalism offer? A life-time of toil at a bare subsistence, a drab, colourless existence with always the dread fear of the sack.

The task now before us is to abolish wage slavery by the overthrow of capitalism and the construction of a socialist society. Only then will humankind become really free. Together we can form a worldwide Co-operative Commonwealth. Help us to secure for all a free, full and happy life; secure in possession of a rational, human existence, neither brutalised by toil nor debilitated by hunger, and then all the noble characteristics of humanity will have full opportunity to expand and develop. Your proper place is in the ranks of the Socialist Party, fighting for the abolition of this accursed social system which grinds us down in such a manner; which debases the character and lowers the ideals of people to such a fearful degree. Rather than promoting a policy of self-abasement, the Socialist Party advocates principles of defiant self-reliance and trust in the people's own power of self-emancipation.

Be realistic, do the impossible

We are socialists because we share a vision of a humane social system based on rational planning, meaningful work, a healthy and sustainable environment, with gender and racial equality. Under capitalism, markets manufacture scarcity. Anything that is in abundance cannot be sold on the market. As capitalism must constantly grow without limit, so too must it also relentlessly create scarcity.  Capitalism is driven to destroy abundance. We live in an interconnected world. Nobody can escape climate change, which will be a problem so long as the world capitalist market persist. Local economies are perpetually undermined by world markets. Ideas about reverting to family farming and small business economy, breaking up monopoly capital don’t recognise the real forces driving capitalism. Concentrated capital can’t be opposed by weak capital. Alternative economic forms can’t escape the net of capitalism without first overturning it. Thus, even worker-owned cooperatives must exist and make a profit within the capitalist framework, or they go under. This isn’t to say these are not worthwhile efforts, but their limits under capitalism should be recognised. Our goal is a social and economic system based on direct democracy in politics and economy and on democratically planned production. We want a system of production and distribution that is in accordance with the needs of each individual and of society as a whole, and which takes into account the regenerative capacities of the natural environment. For us in the Socialist Party socialism is not a utopian vision of a distant future.

Many ecologists are rooted in the idea that “civilisation” threatens the rest of the planet, passing over any mention of the role of capitalist production entirely. If the problem lies in the individual amoral actions of humans, divorced from economics and politics, this opens the door to blaming certain humans for the ecological crisis. Focusing on overpopulation rather than resource misdistribution and capitalist growth boils down to blaming the poor. It ignores the facts that that the average American has an enormous carbon footprint compared to those in the Global South. The military machine produces massive emissions and pollution, and much of the industrial pollution in the developing world is from production for First World consumption. Also ignored is that birth rates rise with poverty and fall with adequate social development and the empowerment of women.

“Tragedy of the Commons” is an invented fable by Garrett Hardin, a University of California professor who argued for sterilisation of “genetically defective” people and against foreign food aid because it would enable starving children in poor countries to survive, increasing overpopulation. It has been used as justification to disenfranchise indigenous people of their land and delegitimise non-capitalist social systems. It argues for enclosure and privatisation of public property on the claim that users of the commons are inherently selfish and will overuse the resource by trying to outcompete their neighbour. It has no basis or evidence in reality whatsoever. In reality, communities with common ownership of property have existed stably for thousands of years by self-regulating through common decision-making. This was true democratic, social management of resources, and it resulted in balance. It is private property in the capitalist era which has driven over-exploitation, the exact opposite of Hardin’s thesis.

The goals of The Socialist Party is a life free of exploitation, insecurity, poverty; an end to unemployment, hunger and homelessness; an end to all forms of discrimination, prejudice and bigotry; the extension of democracy and the creation of a truly humane and rationally planned society that will stimulate the fullest flowering of the human personality, creativity and talent. The advocates of capitalism hold that such goals are unrealistic because that human beings are inherently selfish and evil. We are confident, however, that such goals can be realised, but only through a socialist society. Since its inception capitalism has been fatally flawed. Its inherent laws - to maximise profit on the backs of the working class - give rise to the class struggle. History is a continuous story of people rising up against those who exploit and oppress them, to demand what's theirs. Socialists say that capitalism won't be around forever. Just like previous societies weren't around forever either. Slavery gave rise to feudalism and feudalism to capitalism. So, too, capitalism gives rise to socialism.

Poverty will be ended quickly with the end of unemployment and the redeployment of the vast resources now wasted in war production. There are plenty of jobs that need doing and plenty of people who can do them. Automation at the service of the working people will lead to both reduced hours of work and higher living standards, with no layoffs. Under capitalism, improvements in skill, organisation and technology are rightly feared by the worker, since they threaten jobs. Under socialism, they offer the chance to make the job more interesting and rewarding, as well as to improve living standards. Socialism provides moral incentives because the fruits of labor benefit all. No person robs others of the profits from their labour; when social goals are adopted by the majority, people will want to work for these goals. Work will seem less a burden, more and more a creative activity, where everyone is his/her neighbour's helper instead of rival. With capitalism gone, crime will also begin to disappear, for it is the vicious profit system that corrupts people and breeds crime.

There are broadly two ways in which the socialist movement strives for change. Some like ourselves are organised as parties to gain political power. Others are organised as protest movements fighting for change but with no desire to seize political power. We believe that the struggle for socialism must necessarily make use of both types of strategies in parallel for the abolition of the existing social relations. To carry through the socialist economic and social transformation requires political rule by the working class - a government of, by and for the people. Capitalists like to claim that socialism means dictatorship and capitalism means democracy. The opposite is true. Capitalism is the dictatorship of the market, a system of the rich, for the rich, by the rich. Socialism completes the democratic project by extending popular decision making to the economic sphere. Socialism is democracy. Capitalism is a system of wage slavery which turns individuals into commodities who are purchased and owned through market exchange which creates a sense of being owned and a loss of dignity.  

The Socialist Party say that it is possible to bring socialism through peaceful means, through the ballot box. One thing is clear, there won't be socialism until the majority of the people want it. Socialism is our vision for the future. It is a vision winning more and more people to because it is the logical replacement for capitalism and the next inevitable step up the ladder of human civilisation.

A very brief intro to the SPGB

Share the World, Spare the Planet

The fundamental basis of socialism is that being at the end of the long chain of exploitation workers have no alternative but to fight back. It is the working class that acts, not the revolutionary political party independently of the class. It may prepare the ground for that action by education and agitation, try to support and strengthen that action when it arrives, unite the diverse sections of the class but the emancipation must be the work of the people themselves.

The Socialist Party stands for the abolition of every form of domination and exploitation, whether based on social class, gender, race, age, sexual orientation, or any other characteristic. It is committed to the transformation of capitalism through the creation of a democratic socialist society based on compassion, empathy, and respect.  Socialism will establish a new social and economic system in which workers and community members will take responsibility for and control of their neighbourhoods, their local administrations, and the production and distribution of all goods and services. We call for common ownership and democratic control of productive resources, for a guarantee to all of the right to participate in production, and to a fair share of society's product, in accordance with individual needs. The Socialist Party stands for a fundamental transformation of the economy, focusing on production for need not profit. The Socialist Party believes that art is an integral part of daily life, and should not be treated as a commodity produced by the activity of an elite group.  All members of society should have ample opportunities for participation in art and cultural activities. From each according to ability to contribute; to each according to needs. That is the best principle that can guide the life of our society today.

Working people have no country, but rather a bond based on class. Workers throughout the world have far more in common with each other across national boundaries than with their bosses in their own countries. A socialist revolution must be a world-wide revolution that cannot survive if confined to individual countries amidst global capitalism. It is evident that the workers urgently need to burst the bounds of the nation state and organise on a world scale. The Socialist Party works to build a world in which everyone will be able to freely move across borders, to visit and to live wherever they choose. We advocate the common ownership (non-ownership) and democratic control of all our natural resources in order to conserve resources, preserve our wilderness areas, and restore environmental quality. Socialism means the protection of the earth, and the celebration of community. Sharing the means of production and distribution makes for a classless society. When people who collectively own the means of production work toward a common goal and share their products in common, when they contribute labour without wages and enjoy the fruits free of any charge, that is socialism.

The Socialist Party recognises that it has no hope in the capitalist economic system. Capitalism subordinates people’s welfare, such as the present pressing urgency to address climate change, to private, short-term and pecuniary interests. Capitalism generates large-scale unemployment, especially as technology erodes the need for labour, as is the case today. For anyone who has a rational, organisational mentality capitalism is actually an embarrassment. Socialism is now the only means of healing the rift between humanity and the environment that seeks harmony amongst people and between people and nature. Socialists intends to emancipate on a world scale and socialist ideas are weapons in the hands and brains of the exploited.

The capitalist system continues to plunder the riches of the planet at the expense of the majority merely to enrich a small wealthy elite. Our passion to destroy capitalism to free ourselves from this exploitative and to advance to a society that is democratic, co-operative and communal remains unwavering. Socialism is the only viable solution to the capitalism, replacing greed with human need. Socialism is the future and we must build towards it NOW, to join together to create a world solidarity movement, organised and structured, assertive and militant. We commit ourselves to promote popular participatory democracy, an alternative to the barbarism of capitalism and based on cooperation and not competition.

Socialism: All Power to the Imagination

Socialism Is For Tycoons?

Republican presidential hopeful, Newt Gingrich, got it right. He said,
"If we identify capitalism with rich guys looting companies, we're going to have a very hard time protecting it." (Toronto Star, Jan 21, 2012). If he just changed 'companies' to 'workers', he would be there.
The same article, though, shows just how dazed and confused the press is.Gingrich was defending himself against 'anti-capitalism charges'. That's because he attacked opponent, Mitt Romney for his leadership of a private equity firm known for plundering floundering companies and tossing workers into the streets and walking away with $250 million. Later on the article says, " Was Karl Marx correct? Is the boom and bust cycle about to go bust forever?" Something he never supported, of course. And this, "socialism is for tycoons and capitalism is for the rest of us." Go figure where that one came from. Dazed and confused! John Ayers.