Prods vs Papes in Glasgow (1982)

From the May 1982 issue of the Socialist Standard

In 1878 the City of Glasgow Bank crashed to financial ruin. In the same year the Scottish Roman Catholic Hierarchy was restored by the Pope and Charles Eyre became Archbishop of Glasgow. Protestant extremists, such as members of the Orange Lodges (who even today see almost every calamity as part of a global papist conspiracy), probably saw some connection between the two events. Whatever they thought they were certain of one thing: the restoration of Catholic Hierarchy was nothing less than "papal aggression". In response they protested in Glasgow Green. The Army was sent to prevent rioting but fortunately, for Glaswegian working-class skulls, the troops were not called into action.

The main factor leading to both the restoration of the Roman Catholic Hierarchy and the religious intolerance in Glasgow was the vast influx of Irish immigrants who, since the 1840s, had been entering the industrial areas of Britain to escape the famine. From December 1847 to March 1848 alone, about 43,000 Irish arrived in Glasgow, "a mass of broken wretches".

These immigrants were generally unskilled workers who had been forced to live in conditions even more squalid and degrading than those of the indigenous proletariat. They were able, therefore, to subsist on lower wages and consequently occupied the worst slums in the city.

It is a matter of fact that competition for employment between the Irish and the similarly unskilled Glaswegian workers led to a fall in wages for the latter. The native workers did not fail to notice this and, in their brutalised ignorance, blamed the Irish. That the majority of these unfortunate Irish workers adhered to the Roman Catholic brand of religious superstition, instead of the Protestant, was yet another focal point for hatred. The presence, too, of immigrants from the North of Ireland led to violent feuds of the Orange and Green variety among the Irish themselves. Added to this was the quarrelsome nature of the various Scottish Protestant sects who were already squabbling among themselves and were quite prepared to enter into hostilities with the adherents of the "one true church".

Nowadays, in Glasgow and the South of Scotland in general, fewer people are committed to any form of religious superstition; "of 20,000 Roman Catholics registered in Clydebank, only about a third attend church regularly" (Current Account, BBC1 Scotland, 25 February, 1982). Similarly an even greater proportion of those describing themselves as Protestants will only be seen inside a church at their funeral.

This decline in church attendance may seem encouraging, but unfortunately "religious" bigotry still flourishes among many of these non-churchgoers in the form of allegiance to certain football teams" Glasgow Rangers ("Prods") and Glasgow Celtic ("Papes"). These unfortunate and bigoted workers blame each other for all manner of social problems and it is almost incumbent upon Socialist Party of Great Britain speakers in Glasgow to criticise King Billy, the Queen, the Pope and the Catholic church in one breath lest, by reference to one alone, it is assumed by one side that we are in alliance with the other. Sellers of the Socialist Standard in Glasgow pubs must beware of the occasional IRA-supporting Catholics and UDA-supporting Protestants, neither of whom will hesitate to kick one's head in if given the chance; and there are certain pubs, particularly in the East End, into which we dare not go. Regular readers of the Standard will recall that our propaganda meeting of 29 July last year (the Day of the Nonsensical Nuptials) was disrupted by a frenzied gang of Orange thugs and it is a likely attack upon us by some papal-jerseyed hooligans which will prevent us from holding a similar meeting on June 1 (the day of the mumbo-jumbo at Bellahouston Park).

A woman from Livingston, West Lothian, told us (Current Account, BBC1 Scotland, 25 February 1982) that she has no need to think about anything she finds too complicated " . . . the priests, the bishops, the archbishops and the Pope are better equipped to deal with this kind of thing. To advise me". An old man, asked what his religion meant to him, was not quite sure except that he knew it was "great"  . . . "You must go to the chapel". When asked if he had ever rebelled against the church he replied: "No! Rebel? No! No!", as though shocked that anyone could conceive of such a thing.

A widow then informed us that her wayward husband's death-bed return to the faith convinced her of the existence of god. Although she was prepared to listen to other people's opinions, she was not prepared to change her ideas in any way: "I do respect other people's religions . . . I am willing to listen to other people, but I feel, basically, we were all Catholics at one time and . . . it's more the pity that they lapsed from our faith, for maybe good reasons, but basically we should all be Catholic and there's nothing in our religion that I want to give up." ("No Surrender!" seems to be a Catholic slogan as well as a Protestant one.)

The above examples of Catholic "thought" clearly illustrate the harmful effects of religious belief. The Catholic church and the Orange Lodge are very good at producing ignorant, docile and fervently religious wage-slaves, and so long as workers remain in these organisations so long will they neglect to deal with the cause of their poverty.

A leaflet, issued by the Orange Lodge in protest against this month's Papal visit and the Catholic Church's insistence on having its own schools, declares: "As absolute ruler of the Roman Church, Pope John Paul II bears the ultimate responsibility for this disgraceful school "apartheid" (Leaflet:Why Should We Welcome This Man?—He is no Friend of Ours). But responsibility for this lies with those workers who believe the superstitious twaddle preached by the Pope and who therefore find it necessary to obey his instructions to send their children to schools which specialise in the Catholic form of indoctrination. The Protestant variety of religious indoctrination is carried out, not only by their churches and the state schools, but by the juvenile section of the Orange Lodge.

Pastor Jack Glass (who thinks even Ian Paisley is "pro-romanist") also sees the Pope's visit as a major problem, so much so that he stood in the recent Hillhead by-election as the candidate for the Protestant Crusade Against the Papal Visit (388 votes—lost deposit). Another group of religious maniacs has been holding a series of meetings with titles such as "The Papal Visit Examined Doctrinally; the Papal Visit Examined Politically" (Glasgow Evening Times, 6 march 1982). They say: "Does not the sacrifice of our martyred forefathers suffer a grave insult by the permitting of the Pope to come . . . ". On March 24, in Bellahouston Park, about 20 Protestants tried to prevent the uprooting of some trees for the Pope's visit and one woman was arrested while trying to chain herself to a tree. It is most regrettable that so many members of the working class consider it worthwhile to waste so much of their time. It is also regrettable that so many others are eager to see the Pope and will pay £5.00 each to hear his inane incantations.

Socialists hope that the Pope's visit will fail; we hope the lapsed will stay away from the church and that believers will continue to decrease in number. There are no reasonable grounds for belief in the supernatural, or in gods, just as there are no grounds for belief in the existence of pink elephants, leprechauns, fairies or flying pigs. Socialists actively oppose all forms of religious superstition not only because such beliefs are unscientific and act as a barrier to understanding the society in which we live and its historical development, but also because of the socially divisive nature of religion. Workers who suffer from the delusions of religion are prepared to kill their fellow-workers in time of war; there are churches in America where blacks are not allowed; women are often considered subordinate to men and the Catholic Church will neither allow its women to become priests nor decide how many children they will have (although many Catholics now ignore the Pope's ruling on the latter).

The Catholic Church, with its roots in feudalism and its still feudal structure, has adapted very well to capitalism. It has shareholdings in many major companies throughout the world including those producing armaments. Nowadays the Vatican is a major financial institution and it is not surprising that the Pope is such a vehement supporter of capitalism. Only three years ago Pope John II warned his priests in South America against a too injudicious support of workers and peasants in their struggles against poverty.

Had not the Catholic Church an appalling record as a force against social progress, were not the Pope a peddler of reactionary views and religious nonsense, socialists would still not welcome him. Like his opponents in the Orange Lodge, he is no friend of ours.

Johnny Cadillac

  

Nothing changes unless we make them change

Why is it so many people who belong to the left cling to the Labour Party, notwithstanding all their disappointments and disillusionments. Change does not just happen, and it certainly doesn’t just come because one day Jeremy Corbyn might be prime minister at the head of a left-wing Labour government. It comes when people fight for it. And that is why we with our few hundred members determined and a steadfast monthly journal, are still optimistic and confident than all the Left with their resolutions and intrigues masking their self- doubts and internal dilemmas. There is only one possible way in which we and the Left can come together: for them to come to us. The left-wingers consistently fall into the trap of portraying the Labour Party as in some way less capitalist than the Tories. This lesser-evilism strengthens the misconception that the private sector alone constitutes the capitalist enemy, and that the state sector is not really capitalist at all, a myth which many class-conscious workers have long seen through. For the Left, why successive Labour governments have not introduced socialism has nothing to do with the nature of the Labour Party itself. They never say, for instance, that the Labour Party is a capitalist party, or that it does not want to introduce socialism, or that its policies are not socialist, merely that the leaders subvert the rank and file and mislead the grass roots. To argue that there is no alternative to the Labour Party means that there is not the slightest chance, of bringing into being an alternative mass socialist party.

By contrast, the Socialist Party hold that so-called workers organisations like the Labour Party are capitalist to their very core and its members are not surprise at being ’deceived’ and ‘betrayed’ when the Labour Party is in office. We have understood that that the only thing the working class can rely on is its own strength in class struggle and are thus never ’disappointed’ by the Labour Party since we never had any illusions about it in the first place. The left-wing such as the SWP and SPEW, never cease to claim how the working class has been ‘let down’ by the Labour Party, thus such a standpoint confuses by arguing the fact that the Labour Party is in itself not an integral part of the capitalism’s power politics. At the core of socialism lies the question of the necessity of the capture of the state machine by the working class to establish socialism, and the Labour Party has never ever accepted this task. The left gives legitimacy to the view that the working class is better served by the Labour Party than by, say, the Tories and that socialism could, given a bit more determination from the Labour leadership, come about through the kind of reformist measures associated with the Labour Party. Only by breaking loose from labourism can the working class come to rely not on reformist means to advance their interests, but solely on their own class struggles and a genuine socialist party to wage war on the political field. For genuine socialists, the prospect of the Labour Party’s collapse as a mass organisation is to be welcomed.  

There are those who endeavor to portray the Labour Party as containing a socialist membership ready at any time to burst free from the trammels of its leadership and today Jeremy Corbyn is being cited as the party-leader who will act as the catalyst for this. For those who have seen through the role of the Labour Party, however, such affairs are of no concern – let the party tear itself to pieces, with its internecine strife, it is not up to socialists to prescribe remedies to ailing capitalist parties. On the contrary, they should be demoralised as much as possible; all the Labour Party’s contradictions should be used for the sole purpose of exacerbating them, and exposing its capitalist nature to the masses, so as to accelerate its demise, not give it a new lease of life as the Left would have us do.

Obviously there are many in the Labour Party who are sincere workers seeking solutions to the social problems they face and the individual members of the Socialist Party will engage with individual Labour Party members on a particular issue or issues that come up in the daily class struggle we all face together but no degree of cooperation with individual members absolves The Socialist Party from its duty to expose the Labour Party’s class nature. By working in the unions, for instance, with Labour Party members, is not conceding that this party, is in fact a workers’ party. A party’s class nature is determined not by who its members are, or who votes for it, but by its political line, i.e. whose interests it actually serves. Just because many workers still vote for the Labour Party when it promises their version of a ‘socialism’, that does not mean that it is a workers’ party any more than the Liberal Party was at the end of the last century when most working-class electors voted for it. (Those that declare that the Labour Party is ‘the party of the working class’ and that ‘there is no alternative to it.’ Now face the situation, electorally, a major part of the working class which do not vote but now do so for Scottish or Welsh nationalists.) The Labour Party’s political line is to contain working class opposition within the increasingly narrow bounds prescribed by capitalist class rule. The Labour Party is thus prolonging capitalist class rule - it is a capitalist, not a workers’ party. Thus, though its mass base may include some working class elements, its class nature remains capitalist. The Socialist Party is very clear in our standpoint towards the Labour Party. It is a product of capitalism and has been tied to capitalism from its inception. It is consequently dominated by pro-capitalist careerists and intellectuals despite a few exceptions.

The Socialist Party has never opposed trade-union action as ‘reformist’. Far from it; right from the start in its original manifesto the SPGB declared that it was in agreement with “working-class action on the industrial field when based on a clear recognition of the position of the workers under capitalism and the class struggle necessarily resulting therefrom”, but that it was opposed to “all activities of unions in support of capitalism or tending to sidetrack workers from the only path that can lead to their emancipation”. In our view trade-union action is necessary under capitalism, but is limited by being of an essentially defensive nature. To overcome this limitation the workers need to organise themselves into a socialist political party aiming solely at the capture of political power to establish socialism (i.e. the so-called maximum programme).

We need the deepest possible roots in the new protest movements and the working class. And this requires that we educate, organise and agitate to the best of our ability and resources. Our roots in the socialist tradition and this tradition speaks emphatically on every issue. Socialism will abolish the landlord class, the capitalist class, and the working-class. That is revolution; that the working-class, by its actions, will one day abolish class distinctions. Defeats experienced by the working class movement, however, have led to despair and cynicism, to the feeling that the real world will never change. It is no surprise that many workers and activists grasp at straws when the likes of Jeremy Corbyn gains some popularity. But that is not enough in itself. The dominant idea still prevails that the dream of socialism is impossible to achieve so we must settle for compromise and concessions. The only way to combat this reformism is by education in Marxism. People have to be taught the

basic principles of the Marxist analysis of how society has developed and can be changed, to learn the lessons of past working class struggles, how we can understand the modern world, and way the capitalist economy works on behalf of the owning class. People need continually to deepen their understanding of these matters, so that they can cope with all the arguments thrown against them. Some of us are not usually able to put across those ideas themselves in an effective manner and we may well be overawed by some academic putting across opposing ideas. Sometimes we simply do not possess the confidence to put across socialist ideas outside the confines of comrades and friends.  Two things are usually necessary to give this confidence: reading articles and books, and an opportunity to discuss the ideas in a non-intimidating atmosphere, where we are not going to be attacked for getting something wrong. In this way our own organisation may attract a substantial measure of support and to hold out a genuine promise of further growth.

Increasing Poverty Statistics

In June, Statistics Canada released the following figures – In 1975, the minimum wage, expressed in today's dollars, was $10.14. In 2013, it was $10.15, an increase of one cent in thirty-eight years! The number of workers on minimum wage more than doubled between 2003 and 2011, due mainly to free trade agreements killing mostly well-paid manufacturing jobs. Close to one million have lost their jobs since the mid-80s, forcing them into part-time, low-paying, and sometimes dangerous, jobs. More people are living in poverty today, in Canada, than at any time since World War II. There is only one way that workers can feel secure, and it surely is not under capitalism. John Ayers.

What Will They Say?

Climate scientists say that January to May this year were the earth's warmest five months ever recorded. This follows 2014 that was also the warmest year ever. They issued the following statistics, all in Celsius – 0.09 degrees that this January to May surpassed the same period in 2010; 3.1 degrees, the number that Alaska's average temperature for May surpassed the average from 1981 to 2010; 1976 was the last year that was cooler than the global long-term average; Twenty-one years have passed since a month was last cooler than its long-term average (February 1994); 45 degrees was the temperature in Pakistan in the last week of June – the heat killed hundreds. Still, the apologists for capitalism insist that global warming is a problem secondary to the economy. What will they say when the economy no longer exists? John Ayers.

NEITHER RIGHT NOR LEFT BUT WORLD SOCIALISM

Socialism is a worldwide stateless society where money and markets have been abolished and production is collectively planned by all. It is the abolition of all exploitation and oppression, where the divisions of human beings into classes, nationalities and genders has been transcended. Skin colour which function unevenly today as markers of racial and ethnic distinction will carry no more significance than differences of eye colour. Rather than mere worker ownership of factories or state-control of resources, socialist society is one within which “value” as we know it has been abolished and free access to goods has replaced markets and rationing.

 Also abolished is the mental/manual division of labour where there is a great reduction of the social working day, allowing for a maximisation of leisure time and fluidity between different forms of socially necessary labour. Socialism can only be achieved through the revolutionary struggle of the workers, a class whose self-emancipation is the emancipation of all humanity. The working class are those without reserves who must sell their labour power to survive, compelled by these conditions to engage in the economic and political battle against capitalism. In order to triumph in the class struggle the proletariat must organise into a world-wide political party that expresses its exclusive class interests. As socialists we aim for the abolition of the state and cannot deny that any collective project of changing the world means grappling with political power.

We are internationalists. We refuse to side with any nation in worldwide conflicts. We also reject all forms of nationalism as an obstacle to revolution and reject political alliances with nationalists of all stripes including those espousing patriotism for our own countries or “national self-determination” for oppressed groups. This includes rejecting “socialism in one country” or any other national road to socialism. Socialist revolution must be world-wide in scope or nothing. In logical continuity with our internationalist principles is also our conviction in the importance of upholding a pro-immigrant stance. This means support for the abolition of borders and maintaining an uncompromising position against all forms of xenophobia and national chauvinism. Anything less would mean departure from the basic ethic of working class solidarity.

We categorically reject what was the old USSR and its various offshoots such as the People’s Republic of China and Cuba are examples of socialist societies or functioning proletarian dictatorships which serve as models for us to use. While no functioning socialist society has existed, we point to the Paris Commune, the early days of the Russian Revolution, the 1918/19 German Revolution, and aspects of the Spanish Civil War as brief historical moments where the working class grappled with the task of forming a new society.

We uphold the right to open debate, factions and accountable collective decision-making within revolutionary organisations, especially our own. This means opposing bureaucratic 'democratic centralism' and working against the development of layers of leadership. All disputes among fraternal and comradely groups and individuals are to be aired publicly and to be conducted in a manner befitting organisational discipline. Threatening splits to assert minoritarian vetoes over rank and file majorities, personality politics, lack of transparency — all of these are roads to degeneration for any organization. We also reject secretive and authoritarian “cadre” models of organisation that are based on an unchallenged dictatorship of the central leadership over the rank-and-file. Proletarian organisations will either function according to norms of internal democracy or fail. However, we also recognise that democratic forms as such do not have an inherently socialist content and that democracy when meaning the sharing of power between antagonistic classes is to be rejected.

We deny political support for all pro-capitalist parties, including those belonging to the left-wing of capital. Throughout history various factions of the left have served not to advance the class struggle towards socialism but to stifle it. This entails recognising that our enemies aren’t limited to outright reactionaries but also those who defend capitalism under a veneer of anti-capitalist radicalism. Political alliances with reformist or reactionary groups can only mean sacrificing our political independence and compromising our principles.

We do not discourage workers from joining unions to defend their basic economic needs but we recognise that the class struggle must extend beyond the limitations of unionism. Unions are organs of mediation between workers and capital and are thereby structurally compelled to develop bureaucratic and conservative tendencies. Repeatedly throughout history, the unions has proven itself to be a conservative force that stifles the development of the workers’ struggle and act as a roadblock in the fight for socialism. Therefore we reject a strategy of union entryism that seeks to recuperate the existing unions and employ them towards revolutionary ends

All socialists are agreed upon their objective, that being the social and economic freedom and equality for all, and the realisation of the highest individual development and liberty conceivable for all, through the social ownership and democratic control of all the material means of production and existence. They must all agree upon this in order to be socialists.

The Socialist Party seeks to organise the workers of this country, irrespective of creed or race, into one party of emancipation and liberation. It believes that the dependence of the working class upon the owners of capitalist property, and the desire of these capitalists and landowners to keep the vast mass of the people subjugated and dependent, is the cause of all our modern social and political evils – of nearly all modern crime, mental degradation, religious and racial strife, and political tyranny. Recognising this, it counsels the working class of the world to organise politically with the end in view of gaining control and mastery of the entire resources of the world. Such is our aim: Such is socialism. Our method is: Political organisation at the ballot box to secure the election of representatives of socialist principles to all the elective governing bodies and thus transfer the political power of the State into the hands of those who will use it to establish the principle of common ownership. We mean to make the people of world the sole and sovereign owners of the world but leave ourselves free to adapt our methods to suit the development of the times. We live in times of political change. Old party rallying cries and watchwords are destined to become obsolete and meaningless. We appeal to all workers to throw in their lot with the Socialist Party and assist it in giving force, clearness and effectiveness to the gathering working class movement. And on its part the Socialist  Party, conscious of its high mission, pledges itself to pursue, unfalteringly and undeviatingly, its great object – common ownership of the means of producing and distributing all wealth, the material basis of the higher development of the future.

We, in the Socialist Party have been reproached because we reject to drop our socialist principles for the sake of unity. The object of a Socialist Party is the realisation of socialism; and incidentally to assist in the organisation of the working-class and the amelioration of its conditions in existing society. The object of a trade union is to make the best of existing conditions; to make the best terms for its members in competitive society. The co-relation between the two, as well as the difference of function, is thus clearly established. We are trade unionists, but we are more than trade unionists. The trade unionist who is only a trade unionist is to the socialist what the believer in constitutional monarchy is to a republican. The constitutional monarchist wishes to limit the power of the king, but still wishes to have a king; the republican wishes to abolish kingship and puts his trust in the people; the trade unionist wishes to limit the power of the master but still wishes to have masters: the socialist wishes to have done with masters and pins his or her faith to the collective intelligence of a democratic community. We, as socialists bend our energies to the abolition of that principle of evil, whose influence reformists would seek only to mitigate.

The Socialist Party of to-day cannot bring socialism. The Co-operative Commonwealth will be inaugurated by the mass action of the workers. To assert the contrary is a denial of the very principles we acclaim. Workers move along the road towards socialism because circumstances compel them to take that road. Economic laws operate whether they are known or not, but if we understand their operation we can bend them to our purpose pad assist society along the course it tends to travel. As the Socialist Party we must bring this knowledge to the workers. The necessity for political action is taken for granted. Whenever the power of the ruling class asserts itself, then the workers must fight. The State is the political expression of the dominant class, and since that dominant class uses the machinery of the State—law, justice, force—to maintain its own privileges and to impose its will upon the labouring mass, the workers contest their claims by political action. The distinction between political and industrial action is false; they are the two poles of the same movement. Some regard industrial action as more important than political. That belief is without justification.

To the workers belongs the future.

The Socialist Party is organised to assist the working-class movement by a dissemination of its literature, to educate into a knowledge of socialist principles.  It affirms its belief that political and social freedom are not two separate and unrelated ideas, but are two sides of the one great principle, each being incomplete without the other. The Socialist Party is organised because we are face to face with conditions that require united action of our class at the ballot box.

Today’s society rests on ownership of the land and the machinery of production. The owners of most of the land and the tools of production constitute what is the capitalist class. Ownership divides society into two distinct classes. One is the class of employers, and the other is the class of wage-workers (the working class). The working class, by their labour, produce the wealth that sustains society, they lack economic and industrial security, suffer from over-work, enforced unemployment, and their attendant miseries, all of which are due to the present capitalist form of society. The capitalist class, through the ownership of most of the land and the tools of production — which are necessary for the production of food, clothing, shelter and fuel — hold the working class in complete economic and industrial subjection, and thus live on the labour of the working class. Workers, who do all the useful work of society, in order to secure food, clothing, shelter and fuel, must sell their labour-power to the employers who  are the exploiters and live on the wealth produced by the working class.

The interest of the working class is diametrically opposed to the interest of the capitalists. The capitalist class — owning as they do, most of the land and the tools of production — employ the workers, buy their labour-power, and return to them in the form of wages, only part of the wealth they have produced. The rest of the wealth produced by the worker the employers keep; it constitutes their profit — i.e., rent, interest, and dividends. Thus the working class produce their own wages as well as the profits of the capitalists. In other words, the working class work a part only of each day to produce their wages, and the rest of the day to produce surplus (profits) for the owning capitalist class. The interest of the employing class is to get all the surplus (profits) possible out of the work of the working class. The interest of employees is to get the full product of their labour. Hence there is a struggle between these two classes. This struggle is called the “class struggle.” It is a struggle between the owning class — which must continue to exploit the workers in order to live — and the non-owning working Class, who, in order to live must work for the owners of the land and the tools of production.

The ruling class control the State and govern the working class not for the well-being of the workers but for the well-being and profit of the capitalists. It is only by using their political power that the capitalists make their exploitation of the working class legal and the oppression of their system constitutional. And it is only by using their political power that the working class can make their own exploitation illegal and their own oppression unconstitutional. It is only by the use of their political power that the workers can abolish capitalist rule and privilege, and establish a social system based on the common ownership of all the land and the tools of production, to be the share of all. In a socialist society, the only people who live on the work of others, and who have the right to be dependent upon their fellows, are small children, people who are too old to support themselves, the sick and disabled. To win economic freedom the non-owning working class must force this struggle into the political field and use their political power (the ballot) to abolish capitalist class ownership, and thus revolutionise in the interests of themselves the entire structure of society.

To the workers belongs the future. We ask fellow workers to organise with to end the domination of private ownership — with its poverty-breeding system of unplanned production — and substitute in its place the Socialist Co-operative Commonwealth in which every person shall have the free exercise and full benefit of his or her faculties, multiplied by all the modern factors of civilisation.

Edinburgh: Working Class Housing (1961)

From the September 1961 issue of the Socialist Standard

How many boxes of shortbread have caught the customer's eye with a gaudy picture of Edinburgh Castle? And very nice, too: they would not sell much shortbread by showing Edinburgh's slums, although there are enough of them.

Yes, Edinburgh has a slum problem, just like any other great city. Panorama went there a few months back, showing up the damp and rotting houses around Arthur Street, where the workers pay rent to live with the rats and broken sewer pipes.

And like a lot of other places, Edinburgh also has dwellings which are not classified as slums, but which are not much better; it has its prefabs. These, as the Edinburgh Evening Dispatch said recently, are " . . . the relics of the immediate post-war housing crisis . . . " which are " . . . still with us, although when they were built they were intended to be only temporary makeshifts."

Are the prefabs likely to come down soon? The Edinburgh City Council Housing Committee has said that, because the process of removing them is long, and because alternative housing has to be promised for the tenants before the sites can be cleared and new dwellings erected, the prefabs will be with us for some time yet.

Let nobody be deceived that as the slums come down new housing is bound to take their place. Sometimes the land on which they were built has what is called a high site value. In narrow Kirkgate and the surrounding streets a lot of tenements, some of which have been standing for a century or more, have been demolished. No new houses have gone up on the site; instead, a whiskey bond store is being built there and Woolworths are putting up another of their red and gold shops.

What is to the point in all this is that the working class, although they build the beautiful mansions and palaces, can only afford to live in the slum, or the prefab, or the council house, or the little semi-detached. And why is this? Simply because the workers have only one method of getting their living by selling their energies and skills to the capitalist class. These workers own little more than their ability to work. The great cities of Scotland are not theirs, nor are the Lochs and Highlands which they sing about. Sad Irish lads may dream of the Lakes of Killarney, but they are owned by an American capitalist, just as the song said they never could be. Proud Cockneys own nothing of London Town. The working class of the world, in fact, own no country, no city, no land—most of them do not even own the place where they live.

No use to approach that problem with just another slum clearance scheme. It needs a world in which society's first concern is for the security and happiness of the human race. 

The prefabs were supposed to be temporary, but they have been temporary too long. In a way, that applies to capitalism as well.

David Lamond.

Edinburgh Branch

This is what socialism is

Often in explaining our case for socialism it is set in a series of rejections, no division into classes, no capitalism, no private property, no exploitation, no wages,  no money, no nation-state, no leaders…etc  Frequently we fail to provide examples of meaningful action, positive strategy, and prescriptive examples.

What socialists seek to establish is a modern, highly organised society where the use of technology will save labour time and enhance leisure time. Re-designing work and getting rid of hazardous or polluting technology will be priorities in a social transformation that aims at human liberation and environmental sustainability. A high standard of material life. Good food, comfortable spacious housing, good quality clothes, furniture etc. Things will be made to last. There will be a welcomed acceptance of the differences between us and a willingness to help those that need it and to be guided by those with particular skills or knowledge. The culture will have an emphasis on the community rather than the individual. With inspiring education for kids and adults.

Capitalism is a system of exploitation and oppression. A small class of capitalists owns the companies, the machinery and technology and all the other economic assets. This puts them in control of the whole society. The working class is forced to hire out our ability to work to the employing class (capitalists) in order to live. The capitalists’ relentless drive for profits means they will intensify working conditions and pollute the environment if it will help them make more profit. The ecological crisis of our time has its roots in the capitalist market. Companies only worry about things that have a market price. Corporations shift real human costs onto others when their pollution has ill effects on worker health, or working class neighborhoods or communities of color. Businesses pollute because they don’t have to pay for the real costs to humanity from their pollution. We envision a world where common ownership of the earth, a socially controlled economy, and the direct democracy of communities acts as guardian of ecological sustainability.

To maintain its ability to govern, the ruling class needs to retain legitimacy in the eyes of the population. During periods of upheaval or severe class conflict, they may offer via the government concessions. This is the origin of the “welfare state” and what’s called the “social wage” — free healthcare, welfare benefits and subsidies and so on. We desire no top-down bureaucratic government structure of the sort that would be called a state. People  have institutions of communal control to ensure protection of the environment and ensure a generous system of social provision of goods and services and this places the communal aspects of society at the center.

Self-emancipation of the working class requires that the working class gain power over society.  The working class can free itself through the development of self-managed movements that develop through the class struggle. The class struggle is not limited to the workplace but also spreads out into the broader community. We advocate a strategy for social change “from below,” based on mass participation, direct democracy and the capture of State power through the ballot. The human species needs to evolve a new form of world association that respects the autonomy and differences of all peoples while allowing for democratic decision-making, rooted in grassroots institutions such as delegate congresses, to resolve global problems. Interdependence and the global nature of capitalist power mean that a revolution that can liberate the working class from capitalism needs to spread across national borders. An international movement is needed to defeat the bosses. We advocate solidarity between workers in different countries, and the development of a world-wide workers organisation that can coordinate struggles across borders.

The working class, through its own united action and run the entire system of production, distribution and services on behalf and according to the wishes of the whole of society. To replace capitalism, we do not support what is described by some as “market socialism” where workplaces are the collective private property of sections of the working class. Market competition would pit workers against each other. The land and means of production must become the common property of everyone in society. Self-management means that people control the decisions that affect them. We envision regional and national congresses of delegates elected by the base assemblies that would have the basic power of making decisions about social rules and society-wide priorities. The basic building blocks of a self-managed society would be assemblies of workers in workplaces and of residents in neighborhoods. These assemblies would be federated together throughout society. A self-managing society needs a governance structure through which the people make and enforce the basic rules of the society. The liberatory social transformation that we seek will not be brought about by a political party running a hierarchical state but through the creation of institutions of collective self-management by a working class. “The emancipation of the working class must be the work of the workers themselves.” We reject the Leninist theory of a “vanguard party.” We do not claim to have the final “correct line” or all the answers but do argue that we have the basic principles for the success of a social revolution. Our movement for emancipation cannot accept the line of action urged by some in the workers’ movement that aspire to a harmony between capital and labour, desiring compromise with capitalism and concessions to the bosses and collaboration with the State. We cannot accept ideas which are contrary to the goal for a society based upon the greatest possible liberty and well-being for all, which is the goal of all conscientious workers.

.

Why war and how to stop it

Part of the aim of the socialist movement is the permanent elimination of war. Modern warfare war threatens not merely suffering and death to millions, but with the development of nuclear and biological weapons, the actual destruction of human civilisation, and for humanity a return to barbarism. The first step in the struggle against war is a clear understanding of the causes of war.

The driving force of the capitalist mode of production is the necessity for the continual accumulation and expansion of capital. This necessity is inescapable. Capitalists must constantly attempt to expand capital, in order to maintain profits. Capitalists of every major capitalist nation are faced with the following situation: In order to sustain the system which sustains them, they must find continuous outlets for capital investment and re-investment; but the internal market, provided by the capitalist mode of production within any single nation, is not, sufficient to re-convert into capital values the values of commodities turned out even by existing capital equipment, much less of new. Consequently, the capitalists of each nation are forced to seek outlets for capital investment (and likewise consumer markets) beyond the national borders. There must be added to this basic drive of capital for accumulation, the closely related struggle for sources of raw materials, for control of shipping routes, for the right to install military bases at geo-political strategic points around the globe and for the ability to manufacture in countries where the standard of living is lower than in the home country, and the determination of the home capitalists to keep the home market for their own purposes by tariff’s, and import quotas.

Since the world is limited in extent, since the areas available for new forms of capital expansion and exploitation are growingly restricted, conflict is not only likely but inevitable. The battles of the capitalists are fought on a world-wide scale. Into the neo-colonies and proxy-nations, those “spheres of influence”, flow the surplus capital funds, imperiously demanding to be set to work at making profits. The political arms of the capitalists – the governments of their respective countries – are extended watchfully over the new investments. They are ever ready to unseat a government by regime-change, intervene to stop “terrorism”, stop or start a revolution, send a flotilla of warships or a regiment of marines or declare a no-fly zone.  

The truth of the matter is capitalist society is continuously at war or constantly making preparations for war. The camouflage that war wears – appearing as due to “national” or “cultural” or “religious” differences must not be allowed to hide the fundamental conflicts which are the true source of modern war. Though these other factors may provide the final push that sets open war going or may modify the character of a war, there is nothing in their own nature that must necessarily lead to war. They are the tools of the forces making for war, not the cause of these forces. Modern war is neither accidental nor due to the evil of human nature nor decreed by God. War is of the very essence of capitalism, as much a part of capitalism as wage labour.

One misconception often made by anti-war campaigners comes from the wide-spread belief that this struggle is somehow “independent” of the class struggle in general, that a coalition of all sorts of persons from every social class and group can be formed around the issue of stopping war, since – so the reasoning goes – these persons may he all equally opposed to war whatever their differences on other points. War is thus considered something separate from its causes and conditions, an abstraction instead of a concrete historical institution. Acting on this belief, attempts are made to build up all kinds of permanent peace movements and anti-war alliances. At times they seem to settle a war situation “peacefully”, this is only because the interest of the dominant powers is against an immediate outbreak. Postponement serves only to assure a greater conflagration when the time comes. They serve, in point of fact, as additional means whereby the great powers can carry out their aggressive aims. In practice anti-war pacifism aids war: by spreading illusions about the nature of war and the fight against it; by shifting the energies of honest opponents of war to a fictitious fight against it; by sugar-coating the realities of capitalist society and thus making them – including war – more palatable. Some anti-war activisits will be  preparing a betrayal when its leaders will decide that a particular “humanitarian” crisis will make  this war different and call for the military intervention of the government. No, the pacifist way is not the way to fight war.

The only way to get rid of war is to remove the cause of war. War is not the cause of the troubles of society. The opposite is true. War is a symptom and result, of the irreconcilable troubles and conflicts of the present form of society, that is to say, of capitalism. The only way to fight; against war is to fight against the causes of war. Since the causes of war are an integral part of capitalism, it follows that the only way to fight against war is to fight against capitalism. But the only true fight against capitalism is the struggle for socialism. It therefore follows that the only possible struggle against war is the struggle for the socialist revolution.

The Socialist Party is absolutely clear on this point. There is no “separate” or “special” struggle against war. The struggle against war cannot be divorced from the struggle of the workersto establish a socialist society. No one can uphold capitalism – whether directly, as an open adherent of the capitalists, or indirectly, from any shade reformist position – and fight against war, because capitalism means war. Only a socialists can fight against war, because only a socialist advocates the road to the overthrow of capitalism. So to suppose, therefore, that the Socialist Party can ally “against war” with non-revolutionaries is a disastrous illusion. Any organisation based upon such a platform is not merely powerless to prevent war; in practice it acts to promote war, both because it serves in its own way to uphold the system that breeds war, and because it diverts the attention of its members from the real fight against war. There is only one method to wage war against war: socialist revolution. 

Revolution can and will eliminate war because, by overthrowing capitalist economy and supplanting capitalism with a socialist economy, it will remove the causes of war. With socialism there will no longer exist the basic contradictions that lead to war. The expansion of the means of production, under the ownership and control of society as a whole, will proceed in accordance with a rational plan adjusted to the needs of the members of society. Socialism will remove the limits on consumption, and hence permit the scientific and controlled development of production. Thus, inside a socialist system, war will disappear because the causes of war will have been removed.

It is the business of the Socialist Party, upon the outbreak of any war, to work to turn that war into a class war. The aim of the Socialist Party includes the elimination of wars of all kinds and we know that this can be accomplished only through one particular kind of war – the class war. All the fine phrases and noble sentiments and even the deep sincerity of pacifists are powerless against war, when not actually of assistance to the war-mongers. The knowledge that this is true is hard for many, even for some socialists, to accept. Many feel, it is important to share something in common the non-revolutionary millions from the working class who oppose war. They appeal for unity saying, we all agree in our opposition to war, in our repugnance to its barbarity, its cruelty and horror, and we both share an earnest wish to put an end to it. “Can we not all join together on this basis, leaving other differences aside?”  Surely, the addition of the reformers will offer greater forces to defend ourselves against war and its destruction and we will come into closer contact with them to win them gradually to our side on other questions.

Such sentiments are mistaken whatever their appearances. Socialists have little in common with these the anti-war opposition. The reason for this is that those who oppose war do not really oppose war at all. They do not, because they do not oppose the causes of war, and are not willing to take steps to remove these causes – that is, take revolutionary steps. Their “opposition” to war, therefore, is in the last analysis, a salve to soothe their consciences.

The Socialist Party takes to the platform and addresses the audience: “You believe you are opposed to war. Very well, we will take you at your word. If you are opposed to war, you must want to get rid of the causes of war. We will show you what the causes are ...” And proceed to demonstrate how real opposition to war must lead to a revolutionary position. Some have come into the socialist movement from anti-war activities. Many more will do so, if we make an intelligent and clear approach to them. Their anti-war stand, if carried to their logical conclusion must lead to a revolutionary understanding. But too much should not be expected: economic interest the powerful propaganda of the ruling class will, in the majority of cases, prevent anti-war activists from accepting the full reasoning of our position. But not in all cases and the Socialist Party does not ignore any avenue of approach. Thus the issue of anti-war is correctly seen as rich potential for socialist education and agitation. Workers honestly against war can be shown how only socialism will eliminate it. It is, therefore, necessary for socialist to attend anti-war protests and meetings not to pledge that “we are all engaged in a common fight”, but to present openly and unequivocally the socialist analysis of war and to show why all other analyses are wrong. It is the part of the duty of the Socialist Party to expose where we can the war plans and diplomatic manoeuvers of governments, offering analyses of treaty summits, armaments spending, and “war games in order to make clear to the working class the exact level of threat of war, and to pierce through the double-talk of the capitalist statesmen.

Some on the “radical” left propose the simplistic solution and very deceptive slogan, of “a general strike to stop the war,”. A general strike at the outbreak of a major war would be a revolutionary strike; only those who are prepared to carry it through to the revolutionary capture of the State by the workers can genuinely advocate it. It pre-supposes a tremendously advanced conscious working class because without this such a crucial political action would either evaporate or go quickly down in the uselessly spilled blood of the strikers. The State, staking its existence on embarking upon –war – is scarcely going to give up and accept defeat from abroad because of pressure at home and since it is prepared to sacrifice the lives of its troops, killing strikers and pickets to suppress the General Strike will scarcely register. Unless the pressure at home is at a level of a social revolution to overthrow the State and establish socialism then it must be prepared for defeat. War will be defeated only by the revolutionary struggle of the workers. The real building of socialism will be accomplished in the only way it can be accomplished by the self-emancipation of the working class understanding and conscious of its actions. Any other direction lies disaster, and the triumph of reaction.

Learning about socialism

The task of the Socialist Party is to present the full uncompromising socialist position. The present labour movement are in general disarray, striving to understand and overcome their heritage of class collaboration. We raise no illusions of the extent struggle is required to win socialism. For this the workers must be prepared. "If we struggle we can win” or “workers united cannot be defeated” are deceits.  There are plenty of workers’ struggles that do not win. Leftists who claim to know the truth about capitalism and its state and who still raise reformist illusions are lying to the working class.

 For workers, the availability of employment is central for existence. Jobs are the primary if not exclusive means of income, it occupies a great portion of time and is a source of dignity and achievement. But its importance goes far beyond this in considering workers as a whole, their role as a class. Workers form the key productive component of modern society. They run and maintain machinery, build factories and homes, work up the various products for the market—in short produce and reproduce society.

But the tragedy is that a growing percentage are not being allowed to do that, even though there is a crying need for more services and products for the masses. What is behind this madness? It is the nature of the capitalist system itself. To understand it, we turn to its greatest critic and the founder of scientific socialism, Karl Marx.

Marx holds that unemployment results from the basic drives of capitalism. Labor power is a commodity brought to market by workers. To keep its costs down capitalism can either raise the supply by forcing new layers (e.g. immigrants ) onto the labour market, or it can lower the demand by automating labour-intensive production processes. It does both.

Thus capitalism has an inherent drive to introduce new technologies, to revolutionize production. The chief result is accumulation by reducing the proportion of living labor to “dead labour": machinery and materials. Marx made the striking observation that while generals win wars by recruiting armies, capitalists win their competitive wars by firing them. Under the impact ofnew technology, workers are thrown into the street to form what he called the “industrial reserve army,” a mass of disposable labour. Marx noted that this “army” could be used in several ways. One is to supply masses of labor when and where the need arises without disrupting production elsewhere. Another is as a club against the employed workers, a constant downward pressure on wages and combativity. Thus factors that result from capitalist production become key to its success.

But if a surplus labouring population is a necessary product of accumulation or of the development of wealth on a capitalist basis, this surplus-population becomes, conversely, the lever of capitalistic accumulation, nay, a condition of existence of the capitalist mode of production.

Among Marx’s other observations are: 1) the size of the reserve army depends on the needs and conditions of capitalist production; it does not indicate absolute overpopulation; 2) it varies with the cycles of capitalist development—smaller at the end of the boom period, larger in times of crisis—but its existence is constant; 3) it has an active element that Marx termed the “floating” section (including part-timers), a more destitute “stagnant” part, and a “latent” element composed of a population rendered superfluous by productive developments in agriculture and other spheres where capitalist methods were being newly introduced.

Most important, capitalism relies on the working class to produce its source of profit—surplus value. By its nature, it cannot transform the productive forces in a fundamental way to overcome this dependence. Automation has brought big-time changes, but an isolated look at its dazzle can leave a misimpression of just what is being achieved. A look at capitalist society as a whole reveals the limitations. Alongside the automated factory, the sweatshop has re-emerged.

Capitalism is still driven to innovate but in a haphazard, sectional manner. Behind a facade it conserves out-dated production methods and resurrects older ones. The result is an uneven development that projects the dream of an automated world without being at all able to carry it out. Exploitation of the worker remains absolutely central to the capitalist order, but the employers must rely ever more heavily on the reserve army. People must be kept from working to keep wages low, just as farmers are discouraged from growing too much, to keep prices high. These are vicious absurdities, symbols of the inhumanity of this system. The only solution is to replace capitalist rule with workers’ power.

The wasted years (2002)

From the October 2002 issue of the Socialist Standard Ten years ago at the Rio Earth Summit a 12-year old schoolgirl from Vancouver, Severn Cullis-Suzuki, made a speech to delegates that astonished them. It is worth repeating part of that address : “I am only a child, yet I know that if all the money spent on war was spent on ending poverty and finding environmental answers, what a wonderful place this would be. In school you teach us not to fight with others, to work things out, to respect others, to clean up our mess, not to hurt other creatures, to share, not be greedy. Then why do you go out and do the things you tell us not to do? You grownups say you love us, but I challenge you, please, to make your actions reflect your words.” That speech had such an impact that she became a frequent invitee to UN conferences. She is now 22, with a BSc in biology from Yale University and she attended the recent conference in Johannesburg as a member of Kofi Annan's World Summit advisory panel. So what does she make of the progress in the last 10 years? “I spoke for six minutes and received a standing ovation. Some of the delegates even cried. I thought that maybe I had reached some of them, that my speech might actually spur action. Now, a decade from Rio, after I've sat through many more conferences, I'm not sure what has been accomplished. My confidence in the people in power and the power of an individual's voice to reach them has been deeply shaken” (Time, 2 September). Cullis-Suzuki's pessimism is well founded when you compare some of the figures over the last 10 years : Then 17 million refugees, now 20 million refugees. Then 5,000 species threatened, now 11,000 species. Then rainforests being depleted at 17,000 sq.km a year,now speeding up to 1 percent depletion per year. Then carbon dioxide omissions 356 parts per million in the atmosphere, now 370 parts per million. The list is long and horrifying, for instance the Antarctic ozone hole is now three times the size of the United States. Cullis-Suzuki has now retreated from her schoolgirl world view into organising locally to get people to cut down on household garbage, consuming less and using their car less frequently. What a dreadful commentary on this awful society of capitalism that it turns youthful zeal and enthusiasm into pathetic and petty reformism. Socialists don't make the mistake of appealing to the governments of the world to stop polluting our world, because we know that is futile. Instead we call on our fellow workers to join us in the struggle to rid the world for ever of the cause of these problems, world capitalism. Only then will we be able to attain that 12 year old's beautiful vision . “What a wonderful place this would be”. Richard Donnelly Glasgow Branch

Not Bloody Likely

In the US, there is a turnaround in the textile business. Manufacturing is returning to that country from China. The reason? Costs have gone up in China due to rising wages, energy bills, and logistical costs and lowered in the US. In South Carolina, companies can locate residents desperate for work, even at depressed wages, and subsidized cotton. Boston Consulting estimates that for every $1 spent on production in the US, China spends 96 cents. Although most of the production moving out of China is going to places like Bangladesh, India, and Vietnam, some is returning to North America. Could it be the patriotic flourish of big capital? Not bloody likely, it's all about money! John Ayers.

No Matter The Consequences

In Finland, the home of Nokia mobile phones, 10,000 were laid off and the company was bought by Microsoft who promptly fired a further 18,000. These are mainly top IT jobs that we are constantly told are the key to economic prosperity. Although the Finnish government has tried to help with grants and training programs, capital will do what is necessary to maintain the production of profit and accumulation of wealth by the few, no matter what the consequences may be. John Ayers.

The mind guides the hand

The Socialist Party concern itself with analysing the capitalist system, pointing out its defects and advocating the replacing of the capitalist system by the common ownership and democratic administration of the means of production and distribution. The success and progress of the socialist movement will depend very largely upon the method of education and the political tactics of the Socialist Party. The political programme of the Socialist Party is essentially constructive. There is no place in the political movement for the midnight palace coup and any cataclysmic transformation of society. Socialism does not advance necessarily in response to or because of great industrial distress. These crises may point out the fact that something is wrong, but the suggestion of the remedy and the cure for these ills is quite a different problem. Being merely anti-capitalist cannot bring about the cooperative commonwealth. We require a clear vision of our objective. Socialism meant the immediate communisation, according to a definite predetermined plan, of the means of production and distribution. The Socialist Party, denies the right of a person to call himself a socialist, in any sense whatever, on the strength of advocating the municipalisation of gas and water, or the acquisition of the railways, by the State. This is not a dogmatic statement of how the change will come about, but the expression of general meaning and ultimate significance of revolutionary social change. We consider it irrelevant to bandy words over the relative cost and advantage of a nationalised railway system over a privately-owned one. In both we find the class struggle and the extraction of surplus-value. Never has the need been greater than now for socialists to conduct a campaign for the socialist society. But how does the policy of supporting the “lesser-evilism of good” capitalist politicians stand up when we examine the conduct of Labour politicians? Socialists, in our opinion, never become partisans of one capitalist policy versus another. The overthrow of capitalism that is our demand; it is the ONLY demand of the Socialist Party.

Whatever one may think of the Socialist Party one must admit that its adherents are not of the type to give up without a struggle. We share the same viewpoints and walk the talk. In elections out candidates spell out the alternative to capitalism and we face the usual accusations of sectarianism for promoting socialist ideals by leftists who refuse to accept that the first step towards the building of a strong socialist party is knowledge and understanding. It is not simply a question of good will and solidarity. We know that the principles of socialism are necessary to the emancipation of the working class. The question is one of the need for revolutionaries to explain patiently where workers are being misled.

While drowning mankind in blood with its vile wars capitalism also befouls the world atmosphere with pollution. We have seen that capitalism means a small section of the population controls production and is not answerable to the rest of the community. At the moment the workers shows no interest in socialism which is generally regarded as “voting Labour.” The Socialist Party must spread its case for socialism as widely as possible, relating it to the questions of the day, so that as political consciousness strikes deeper roots, the socialist arguments can pull as many as possible from destructive rebelliousness to constructive social revolution. The Socialist Party proudly declares itself a party of revolutionary socialism. This means we stand for the abolition of capitalism, nothing more and nothing less. We do not stand for the reform of any institution under capitalism. Our activities are always directed towards the complete overthrow of capitalism, and to that end we concentrate our attention upon the education of our fellow men and women who are engaged in wealth production and who are exploited in the process. A socialist party is an organisation of the working class and its weapon. And the hand that grips that weapon must know whom it is fighting, to what purpose it makes its thrusts, and what it intends to do when the enemy is conquered and destroyed. The weapon can be forged only in the flame of thorough discussion. The mind guides the hand – our theories are clarified by criticism and analysis as it goes forward in the battle.

Socialism is no utopia

The Socialist Party reaffirms our belief in world socialism and in the principles of human brotherhood as the only force in the world that can bring order out of capitalist chaos and prevent an environmental catastrophe. A new and heartening sign of the fraternal mood that has been growing throughout the world. It now appears that socialists can expect an increasingly favourable response to our activity of presenting socialism as the only permanent solution to capitalism and offering brotherhood for all nationalities. Our socialist alternative will begin to appear realistic to more and more of our fellow workers. Socialists are alert in pointing out the great distinction between "state" and "social" ownership and in reiterating the socialist demand for the complete common ownership of all the means of production and distribution as the only cure for the evils of the competitive system.

Capitalism has worked for Big Business and for the people who own stocks and shares and landed estates.  In the opinion of the Socialist Party the problems which confront the working class can only be solved by the workers taking power into their own hands. As socialists, we surely take as our starting point that capitalism produces sufficient wealth to provide enough for all, but because of the ownership and organisation of production, that wealth is wasted or even destroyed. Capitalism is incapable of providing decent homes, social services and living standards for all. We believe that the correctness of our ideas will become apparent to the whole of the working class. The first job of the Socialist Party is to pool the resources and experience of its members; to give every isolated socialist the confidence to organise and argue for socialism among his or her workmates, neighbours and companions. Real socialism is the only alternative to capitalism and it is worth fighting for. Society can be changed, but only if working people abandon reformism and commit themselves to revolutionary change from below. Only by resisting all attempts at class collaboration, insisting on the independence of the working class, can a movement be built to challenge capitalism in Britain, and to respond with effective solidarity to the struggles of fellow workers in the rest of the world. At present Scottish nationalism and the SNP have the appearance of a ‘progressive movement’ to some sincere people. Often such nationalism is not transparent, for it is skilfully masked by socialist phrases. Deceived by this, Left Nationalists will work in and around the nationalist movement only to discover, in some years’ time, that they have been most cruelly misled, have been wasting their time and worse – have been propagating an at best diversionist movement which they will then have most fiercely to destroy. Socialists must not fall into this trap; they must not be hoodwinked by the ‘potentially progressive’ facade of nationalism. They must unite to expose it now, as part of their struggle for socialism. Instead of tragically wasting their time fostering nationalism (in whatever form), they must arm the people with knowledge and understanding. We can cope with open nationalism for it can easily be discerned. It is much more difficult to combat a nationalism which is hidden beneath a mask of socialism. Any struggle which is not a part of class struggle is a distraction from real issues.

The unity of mankind is an age-old dream. The Christians preached it. Even the capitalists aspired to it from the League of Nations to the United Nations. A slogan in itself means very little unless we consider by whom it is put forward, and with what purpose. As with the slogan ‘Against the War’, many political groups use it and all mean something different by it. Frontiers alone do not cause wars. Wars are caused by the conflict of aims between individual or groups of capitalist powers. This has apparently been ‘overlooked’ by those who prefer to invent a ‘peace plan’ which does not involve the revolutionary overthrow of capitalism. The overcoming of the divisions and conflicts among peoples in this world is no Utopia. Such world unity cannot, however, be achieved by religious morality or bourgeois reformism. The supreme task of our age is to abolish capitalism as an outmoded and dangerous system and proceed to build socialism on a world scale. This can be done only through the action of the working class, not because of any better qualities as individuals, but because of their position and functions in the economy. They are the principal objects of exploitation under capitalism and the fighters against it. And they become the bearers of a higher mode of production and builders of a superior social system under post-capitalist conditions. The uprooting of exploitation and construction of a social order where people can be free and equal with unlimited prospects of advancement will be a climactic achievement of humanity. With the development of new technology, automation and other scientific and industrial accomplishments, mankind has the chance of eliminating all relations of oppression and exploitation and then lightening the burdens of necessary labour – and other curses – imposed by the low levels of labour productivity.

The workers’ movement is strong when it is conscious of a goal and strives for its realisation along class lines. When the class lines become obscured, its strength is dissipated. A socialist party is not an end in itself; it is only a means to an end. It is only a political class expression on the road toward the abolition of capitalism and class society. Nor does it come into being purely as an automatic process. Men must exert their conscious influence and action. The conscious revolutionists particularly must be the leaven in a field of such fruitful work. The socialist movement is in a similar position to that of the child learning to walk. The movement has been born, it has passed through the crawling stage, it has taken a few steps and had a few tumbles, and in the swift evolution of events it will soon be beyond the walking and into the running stage.

SPGB's Dick Donnelly V. the Anarchist Albert Meltzer (Audio)

Which Way Is Left For Socialists?

“Study because we will need all your intelligence.

Agitate because we will need all your enthusiasm.

Organise because we will need all your strength.”

Gramsci

Never before has the Socialist Party had greater need for the recognition of the whole of its ideal. Let the Socialist Party hold aloft its ideas and be above any compromise or concession. It is a democratic party to the highest degree since it wants to give every individual the concrete means of development that alone will permit one to fully realise oneself. Despite its recent shift to the left with the election of Jeremy Corbyn as its leader, all that the Labour Party has laid claim to do up to now is to be able to manage the capitalist ship of state just as good or just as bad than anyone else. It has never seen itself as being, despite its name, a party which represents the working class. It has consistently been a party for “the nation as a whole”. It has claimed to represent the capitalist class as much as the working class. It has therefore never sought to overthrow that ruling oligarchy, but, on the contrary, to gain admittance to its hallowed citadels. The cruelest trick that the Labour Party has played has been to use its position within working class culture to popularise any real vision of socialism distinct from capitalism. And none of the current arguments around the question of party democracy or proposed “radical” policies are projected in terms of the social relationships within socialism. There is a total absence of any class analysis or any characterisation of the state as an instrument of class rule. Nowhere do they indicate how the fundamental contradiction within the capitalist mode of production can be resolved. Perhaps of significance is the definition of the enemies of the working class used by Corbyn and others on the left of the Labour Party which generally consists of “the City of London, the IMF/World Bank, the transnational corporations”, all of which are part of finance capital. Industrial capital is not only largely excluded, but is, indeed, seen as the lifeblood of the nation. The nature of industry, production for profit, and the relations within production are not criticised. If the Labour Party holds out no solution, what are the alternatives?

The principal task of the members of the Socialist Party is to try to restore the credibility of socialism in the consciousness of millions of men and women. We can formulate these as feed the hungry, house the homeless, offer a dignified life to everyone, safeguard the lives of the sick who die from lack of proper medical attention, in short, generalise free access to the wealth of society to all. The producers must hold the real decision making power over what they produce this power must be exercised in a completely democratic manner; that is, it must express the real aspirations of the people. There is a total renunciation on the part of the Socialist Party of all substitutionalism, paternalism and top-down practices. The emancipation of the workers will be the work of the workers themselves. It cannot be done by states, governments, parties, supposedly infallible leaders or experts of any kind. The Socialist Party can only assist people to free themselves by education; they cannot be a substitute for them. Priority must be given to solidarity and cooperation. If we direct our attention and actions against all conditions in which human beings are alienated and humiliated and our practice is consistent socialism will once again become a political force to contend with.

The Socialist Party are revolutionary socialists who believe that capitalism — as a system centered on private accumulation and profit — is inherently a system of inequality, injustice, and war. We want a social system where social wealth is not in the hands of a few billionaires or government officials, but is controlled by the people. The working class is made up of men and women who sell their labour power or are dependent on the sale of labour power (housewives, children, unemployed, etc.). We seek both economic and political democracy.  Human needs cannot replace profit as the driving force of society unless the people control their workplaces and their neighbourhoods. To end exploitation, the working class needs to struggle for its own interests. Our enemy is capitalism. We live in a world where the capitalist mode of production predominates. In order to fight the enemy and win, we have to understand the foe. Capitalism dominates our economic system. Under capitalism, a handful who own the factories, the mines, corporate farms, and the banks control the wealth that the majority of the people produce. It is this system that we are fighting. Capitalism organises globally. Blocs of capital compete intensely for growth and profits. Under capitalism you either destroy the competition, or are destroyed yourself. This drive sends the giant corporations around the world, seeking cheaper raw materials and corrupt local governments that will insure a "friendly investment climate." Capitalism continuously seeks cheaper labour costs. This is why we see so many plants closing down and moving "offshore," i.e., into the Developing World. The capitalist class rules this country. We are told that this is a democracy, where the people rule. It is, however, “their” democracy. It is not just that it takes millions of dollars to run for high office. The state – the government and the legal system – were set up and developed to serve the interests of capitalism, to uphold the rights of property over of the people. Capitalism is a system of violence. Poverty is built into its operation. The capitalist class needs to maintain its grip on the levers of power. History has shown again and again that the capitalists will stop at nothing to maintain their wealth and power. Capitalist democracy is protected by the threat of force.  The capitalist class has kept the working class divided along national and racial lines.

Today’s struggle for a livable planet is a life-and-death issue. Corporate greed has polluted our air, destroyed the soil, poisoned our waters, and drenched our food with dangerous chemicals. To develop our vision of socialism, we will have to deepen our understanding of the relationship between humanity and the rest of nature. People will have to change how they live and how society is organised. The threat to the environment touches everyone. We believe in a socialism where fulfillment will be found in the relationships among people and not in the consumption of things. Only conscious socialist planning by all of society can make this a reality.

Our enemies are organised; we must be organised, also, to bring about socialism and the liberation of the people. The interests of the working class around the world are in the final analysis the same. This means that the interests of the working class has a crucial internationalist aspect requiring solidarity and support for all our struggles. We do not attempt to lay out a blue print for socialism, because the conditions existing at the time of the overthrow of capitalist power will determine the specific path of socialist construction. History has shown that attempts to impose preconceived strategies for socialist construction can result in a dictatorship not of but over the proletariat.

Another Reason To Dump The System

Heralded as a success story for austerity, Spain reports that it is on track for a 3% growth this year and has created one million jobs since 2014. Critics point out that the majority of the new jobs are part time and low-paid. Spain lost 16% of its jobs and 7% of its GDP and the poorest 10% lost 13% of their real income. For example, a forklift operator recently got called back for one week's work and was shocked to see his pay had dropped 35%. The labour reforms that the government enacted while workers were in a weak position makes it easier to dismiss employees and wages dropped accordingly. There is little to be done to fight capital when a recession is on. Another reason to dump the system. John Ayers.

Obscuring Issues

- A way to obscure the main issues facing society today is shown by the selection of a candidate for the Republican party for the upcoming US election. According to David Olive writing in the business section of The Toronto Star, the agenda is dominated by killing 'socialist' Obamacare (Olive says it is actually a Right Wing idea hatched in the Nixon days), the fake crisis of illegal immigration from Latin America (Donald Trump, the front runner to date, has called Mexican immigrants 'drug runners and rapists'), family values as defined by religious right, and whether Obama was born on American soil, (something Trump has railed about since Obama was first elected). There is nothing about poverty, unemployment, the economy, or, most troubling, global warming and tackling the problem, and its consequences. Good smoke screen! John Ayers.