Common Ownership

Why has the working class failed? Why is there little trace of any revolutionary movement among the workers? Why is it that people all over the globe seem incapable of initiating anything aimed at their own self-liberation? To fight you must have a positive aim. The essence of the future free world community is that workers direct their work themselves, collectively. The working class has to search for new roads. The real fight for liberation has yet to begin. A deep inner revolution must take place in the working classes of clear insight, of solidarity, of perseverance, courage, and fighting spirit.  The goal of the working class is liberation from exploitation. This goal is not reached and cannot be reached by a ruling class substituting the capitalists. It can only be realised by the workers themselves being master over production. The aim of socialism is to take the means of production and distribution out of the hands of the capitalist class and place them into the hands of the workers. This aim is sometimes spoken of as common ownership.  

State ownership (nationalisation) is the ownership, i.e. the right of disposal, by a public body representing society, by government, state power or some other political body. The persons forming this body, the ministers, the officials, the managers, are the direct masters of the production apparatus; they direct and regulate the process of production; they command and control the workers. Common ownership is the right of disposal by the workers themselves; the people themselves are direct masters of the production administrating , managing, directing, and regulating the process of production which is, indeed, their common work.

Under state ownership the workers are not masters of their work; they may be better treated and their wages may be higher than under private ownership; but they are still exploited. Exploitation does not mean simply that the workers do not receive the full produce of their labor; a considerable part must always be spent on the production apparatus and for unproductive though necessary departments of society. Exploitation consists in that others, forming another class, dispose of the produce and its distribution; that they decide what part shall be assigned to the workers as wages, what part they retain for themselves and for other purposes. Under government ownership this belongs to the regulation of the process of production, which is the function of the bureaucracy. In other words: the structure of productive work remains as it is under capitalism; workers subservient to commanding directors.

Common ownership is the objective of the working class itself, fighting for self-liberation. Common ownership of the workers implies, first, that the entirety of producers is master of the means of production and works them in a well planned system of social production. It implies secondly that in all shops, factories, enterprises the personnel regulate their own collective work as part of the whole. So they have to create the organs by means of which they direct their own work, as personnel, as well as social production at large. The institute of State and government cannot serve for this purpose because it is essentially an organ of domination, and concentrates the general affairs in the hands of a group of rulers. But under socialism the general affairs consist in social production; so they are the concern of all, of each personnel, of every worker, to be discussed and decided at every moment by themselves. Their organs must consist of delegates sent out as the bearers of their opinion, and will be continually returning and reporting on the results arrived at in the assemblies of delegates. By means of such delegates that at any moment can be changed and called back the connection of the working masses into smaller and larger groups can be established and organization of production secured.

Such bodies of delegates, for which the name of workers’ councils has come into use, form what may be called the political organisation appropriate to a working class liberating itself from exploitation. They cannot be devised beforehand, they must be shaped by the practical activity of the workers themselves when they are needed. Such delegates are no parliamentarians, no rulers, no leaders, but mediators, expert messengers, forming the connection between the separate personnel of the enterprises, combining their separate opinions into one common resolution. Common ownership demands common management of the work as well as common productive activity; it can only be realised if all the workers take part in this self-management of what is the basis and content of social life. 

Europe's Shame

“We can’t advance and we can’t go home…For us, it’s Europe or die.” - Bamba, from the Ivory Coast 

Austria: Austria is requiring refugees to take an “Austrian values” course; one of those values is apparently barbed-wire fences, which it erected to try to keep them from entering the country in the first place.



Belgium: The interior minister has suggested that refugees wear special identity badges, raising the specter of Europe's fascist past.

Bulgaria: As one of the border countries, Bulgaria has militarized its territory to try to stop refugees coming from Turkey. Recently, an Afghan man was shot and killed by border police.

Croatia: Rival political factions have turned the refugees into a political football, wiht some criticizing the government for letting them in and others criticizing the refugees' treatment. The country's border with Serbia has been one of the main entry points for refugees.

Cyprus: The government has made clear it prefers “Christian” refugees, drawing a religious line in the sand; it also wants to limit refugee intake to 300.

Czech Republic: Czech police drew gasps worldwide when they started to write identification numbers on the arms of refugees.


Denmark: Known worldwide as a left-leaning social democratic state, Denmark refused to show solidarity by declining Sweden's plea to share some of the refugees it is importing.

Estonia: Estonia's only refugee center can hold about 100 refugees; far-right parties are calling for a referendum to cap the country's number of refugees, even though the government has only agreed to take in an additional 550 people.

Finland: “Finnish extremist organizations have been activated to oppose immigration, and this is the most visible and concrete security threat,” said Interior Minister Petteri Orpo of the growing backlash against the refugees.

France: French police have reportedly abused refugees, many of them living in tents in squalid conditions. French far-right leader Marine Le Pen declared, with no evidence, that 99 percent of refugees are men.

Germany: Germany has been among the most welcoming countries, choosing to accept as many as half a million refugees a year. Yet there have been beatings and even bombings committed against refugees in the past few weeks as the German far-right reacts to the influx. One German mayor who welcomed the refugees was stabbed in the neck. At least 580 attacks on asylum facilities have occurred this year.



Greece: In Greece, hooded men are hunting refugees arriving by boat. They smash the engines, leaving the refugees stranded.

Hungary: The ruling prime minister has seen his political fortunes rebound due to his anti-refugee stance; both tear gas and water cannons were used to repel refugees.

Ireland: The Irish people have rallied to support refugees, but the country has been fairly modest in the number of refugees it is taking, slating just 4,000.

Italy: Activists say Italian officials are using refugees' countries of origin to define them as economic migrants, which would give them fewer rights and make it easier for Italy to deport  them.

Latvia: Latvia agreed to take just 776 refugees, which set off protests from the far-right. “The refugees are not victims, most of them are here for money,” said one protester holding a picture of Hungary's anti-refugee prime minister.



Lithuania: Lithuania's parliament is trying to wrestle control over where refugees are settled; the country has agreed to bring in just 1,105 people.

Luxembourg: The small but rich EU country has been critical of the harsh response of other countries to refugees, but is only letting in a few dozen itself. One woman who has set up a Facebook page to welcome refugees has to constantly delete hateful comments.

Netherlands: In the Netherlands, cars belonging to left-leaning, pro-refugee lawmakers were set on fire, and other politicians received death threats. A refugee center was burned to the ground, and a renowned rabbi has called for refugee camps to be set up away from the country's Jewish neighborhoods because of anti-gay violence within the refugee centers.

Malta: Malta let in 100 refugees this year; the country is harshly punishing those who bring refugees into the country outside the quota.

Poland: Only 8 percent of Polish citizens surveyed said their country should take more than the 20,000 refugees the country is slated to accept.

Portugal:Portugal has seen protests in response to the small number of refugees it is taking in, with some citizens holding signs saying “Protesters NOT Welcome.”

Romania: Romania's president and prime minister have been quarreling as one made a pact with neighboring countries to close borders to refugees.



Slovakia: One small town in Slovakia held a vote on accepting refugees; 97 percent of the residents said no.



Slovenia: Slovenia's president doesn't want his country to become a “pocket” for refugees, and wants to step up border control to stop them from coming.



Spain: The mayor of Melilla said he “has to defend Melilla and its borders and impose order” in response to protests from the left-wing Podemos party, which is criticizing the country's stance toward refugees.

Sweden: A man donned a sword and attacked a nearby school, killing a student and teacher assistant and injuring others. Witnesses say he attacked only dark-skinned people. The attack came as many in Sweden are trying to stem the flow of refugees.



United Kingdom: UK leader David Cameron infamously referred to refugees as a “swarm.” The issue becomes contentious as the new leader of Labour takes a much more pro-refugee stance than his predecessors.

PRESS RELEASE ON TRADE UNION BILL (EC STATEMENT)

PRESS RELEASE ON TRADE UNION BILL (EC STATEMENT)

The Media Committee is currently sending out the following media release to national media, trade unions & etc.

Restrictions on Trade Unions are ‘act of class war against working people’

As UK government plans to clamp down on trade union rights wait for a second reading in the House of Lords, the Socialist Party yesterday warned they are “an act of class war by the forces of organised capital, aimed against the ability of working people to defend or extend the standards of living of themselves and their families.”

Media spokesperson Robert Cox said: “Workers cannot rely on the House of Lords to stop this legislation. They need to stand together and fight to defeat it themselves. The strike vote by 98% of junior doctors on a 76% turnout shows the way forward.”

In a statement agreed by their Executive Committee, Socialists pointed out that “by seeking to impose minimum turn-out requirements beyond anything required of elected politicians,” this  “exposes the truth” that the governments job is “to work for and on behalf of the British capitalist class” using the law to aim “to prevent workers from organising, democratically and peacefully”.

While the Socialist Party made clear that it “stands in absolute solidarity with the workers”, it warned that industrial action can only win limited benefits which are “under constant threat of being taken back.” 

“The only hope of establishing for all time a good standard of living for all mankind depends on bringing an end to the political and economic control of society by the “one-percent” and in its place the establishment of a world in which all wealth is owned and shared in common by all its people. We call upon all workers to unite to bring this about as soon as possible”, the statement concluded.

For more information about the policies and activities of the Socialist Party visit the website: http://www.worldsocialism.org/spgb/ or specifically about the Trade Union Bill there is a recent article from our journal at: http://www.worldsocialism.org/spgb/socialist-standard/2010s/2015/no-1333-september-2015/more-union-bashing

The Statement in full:

The Trade Union Bill 2015 - Statement of the Executive Committee of the SPGB:

“The Trade Union Bill currently before Parliament represents an act of class war by the forces of organised capital, aimed against the ability of working people to defend or extend the standards of living of themselves and their families.

By seeking to impose minimum turn-out requirements beyond anything required of elected politicians, and forcing agency workers to become strike breakers, this bill exposes the truth of the nature of the state. Far from being an institution representative of the people, the clear purpose of Government is to work for and on behalf of the British capitalist class. In this case by taking further legal measures to prevent workers from organising, democratically and peacefully, to restrain the efforts of their employers to reduce employment costs to an absolute minimum, thereby increasing the profits of their shareholders directly or, by cuts to government spending, indirectly through the reduction of tax on their profits.

The Socialist Party of Great Britain stands in absolute solidarity with the workers of all countries in their efforts to achieve better conditions of employment. However workers should realise that, under the market system for their bosses increasing profits must come before all other considerations. Any material gains made through workers day-to-day struggle will therefore be limited and under constant threat of being taken back. The only hope of establishing for all time a good standard of living for all mankind depends on bringing an end to the political and economic control of society by the “one-percent” and in its place the establishment of a world in which all wealth is owned and shared in common by all its people. We call upon all workers to unite to bring this about as soon as possible.”

Socialism and the Socialist Party

A society which is founded on the system of the rich making the greatest possible profit out of the labour of others must be wrong. The Socialist Party seek a change in the basis of the current system of society - a change which would destroy the distinctions of classes and nationalities. This profit-driven system is maintained by competition not only between the conflicting classes, the capitalists and the working class, but also within the classes themselves: there is always war among the workers for bare subsistence, and among their masters, the employers and middle-men, for the share of the profit wrung out of the workers; lastly, there is competition always, and sometimes open war, among the nations of the civilised world for their share of the world-market. Although we produce all the wealth of society, we have no control over its production or distribution. The people are treated as a mere appendage to capital - as a part of its machinery. This must be altered from the basics: the land, the capital, the machinery, factories, workshops, stores, means of transit, mines, all the means of production and distribution of wealth, must be treated as the common property of all. This change in the method of production and distribution would enable everyone to live decently, and free from the sordid anxieties for daily livelihood which at present weigh so heavily on the minds of the mankind.

Nationalisation which many earnest and sincere persons have preached, would be useless as labour is still subject to the fleecing of surplus value inevitable under the capitalist system. No better solution would be that of state capitalism, whose aim it would be to make concessions to the working class while leaving the present system of capital and wages still in operation: no number of merely administrative changes, until the workers are in possession of all political power, would make any real approach to socialism.

The Socialist Party aims at the realisation of complete socialism , and well knows that this can never happen in any one country without the help of the workers of all the world. For us neither geographical boundaries, political history, nor race 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 bosses whose interest it is to stir up rivalries and hatreds between the dwellers in different lands. Marx pointed out that society would never be remodeled unless the proletariat of all countries did it, and until they did, society would be increasingly torn by growing contradictions and antagonisms, We in the Socialist Party strive for a real revolution and want a real change in society. 

Why socialism?

Socialism focuses the attention of the world on the grave evils of the capitalist system that something needs to be done about. Those social evils are not bred in the heart of man but are bred by capitalism, and by nothing else. Socialism is not a mere reform movement. Capitalism is based on private property, the ownership by a minority of the population of the means of production and exchange. The capitalist class is defined in no other way – and maintained in no other way – except by the ownership of the means of production and exchange. This ownership is what gives the capitalist class power of life or death over the working class and over society as a whole. To live, you, the working person, must not only work for the owners of the means of production and exchange – you must guarantee them a profit. Working for them is not enough; a profit is absolutey required for you to get your job; and that profit can be obtained in no other wise except by exploiting that which is your only real possession – namely your physical or mental capacity to work. That is all the worker has. To live economically, the capitalist must accumulate; not that he wants to or doesn’t – he must accumulate in order to live. To accumulate, he must be assured profit. To profit, he must exploit labour. There is no other way. Capital always seeks to intensify exploitation; labour always and necessarily seeks to resist exploitation. Capitalism seeks what is rightfully its own, from its point of view: the maximum that it can get out of the worker. Labour seeks what is rightfully its own: that’s why it forms class organisations, labour unions. Wealth is produced in no other way than by the labour of working people, then the wealth belongs rightfully to the workers. A revolution of working people who have nothing, against capitalists who have everything in superabundance, is the objective of the Socialist Party. The principle of social ownership of the means of production, ownership and control of the means of production by the whole people, by the producers, is our goal and for us the fullest achievement of democracy: the assurance of material abundance for all by wiping out classes.

 

Capitalism cannot guarantee security to the people, cannot guarantee peace to the people, cannot guarantee brotherhood to the people, cannot guarantee abundance to the people. Any social system which cannot guarantee those to the people stands condemned. The only way to replace capitalism is by socialism.

The Republican Ideal

"Mississippi Yearning" is an article in The Toronto Star, October 19, that describes that the state is America's poorest and sickest state but where, unbelievably, opposition to Obama's health care reforms are fierce. A comment in a barber shop gives some indication of the level of understanding of health care, "Nobody should be handed high quality (health care) coverage simply because they happen to live in America. If you want insurance, get a damned job and pay for it. That's the way I look at it, it's not my job or anyone else's job to pay for their insurance." Unfortunately that's a pretty typical attitude showing a complete lack of understanding of the situation. Presumably he is quite happy to drive on roads that somebody else has paid for and will accept government social programs. Eighty- nine per cent of those who have fallen into the 'health coverage gap' are from the South. The Republican ideal scores heavily in such areas of extreme ignorance! John Ayers

Worker V Capitalist

The lesson of past decades is that the problems facing the great majority of people will never be solved within the confines of the capitalist system. The system of exploitation must be abolished and replaced by a new, higher system, socialism. Our argument with the Left and the policies it is advocating is not that they would not be some degree of benefit to working class, but that measured against the criterion of achieving socialism which is, after all, what the Left claims as its goal, they fall far short. The aim of the Socialist Party is to establish socialism and abolish the right of one man to rob another of the fruits of his labour. This is what makes our Party different from all others. Our aim to make the working class the masters of their own destiny, to win political power, and establish socialism.

The attempt to cover the road to socialism in small steps, to start it off through changes or reforms which are possible under capitalism, leads inevitably to forgetting the final aim and making the means an end in themselves. Changes of capitalism become changes under capitalism. Many reformist ‘socialists’ consider state capitalism the progressive unfoldment of a new social order. The theory envisages capitalism which leads to state capitalism to socialism. State capitalism is not socialism and never can become socialism. State capitalism regulates and directs capital and labour; it seeks to realise the Utopia of peace between the classes, of the abolition, or at least suspension, of the class struggle. State capitalism’s control of the industry will not make it any less ugly than it is under capitalism. Indeed, the direct intervention of the government in its affairs will increase workers’ difficulties.

State capitalism is the old conception of “growing into” socialism, – transforming capitalism into socialism by “democratising” the government, placing it in the hands of “the people.” As a strategy it it strengthens the state and weakens the workers. Capitalism is fundamentally and necessarily undemocratic; it cannot be democratised, it must be abolished by the socialist revolution.

The social revolution becomes a fact when the working class has acquired sufficient consciousness of its control over production and distribution to establish that control in practice. Socialism rejects “co-operation” with the capitalist, in industry. One means of trickery is an arrangement by which the workers “co-operate” with the employers in the consideration of matters affecting a particular industry or factory. All proposals for a sham industrial democracy are useless and dangerous; they are schemes directed at the independence and action of workers, aiming to subordinate the worker to the capitalist.

Gaining Consciouness

There are two ways open to people today. We can continue along the path under capitalism or we can take the socialist road. There are deep differences between rich and poor. It is our aim to build a society in which all are able to live a full life, free of class distinctions and divisions. But we do not believe that this can be done for the people. It can only be done by the people. To this end we work for the widest possible socialist movement in the course of which a new understanding, new relations, can be forged. The achievement of socialism, once a distant dream, is now a reality for all to see. We will move into the realm of a truly human society, where the watchword is from each according to his ability to each according to his needs,‘ and where, in the words of the Communist Manifesto "the free development of each is the condition for the free development of all",  where productive forces supply an abundance of products, when the last remnants of classes vanish and work becomes a pleasure.

Capitalism, by its method of production, has brought isolated workers together and constituted them as a class in society. Capitalism has made the workers a class in themselves. That is, the workers are a distinct class in society, whether they recognize this fact or not. Historical development calls upon this class to reorganize society completely and establish socialism. To do this, the workers must become a class for themselves. They must acquire a clear understanding of their real position under capitalism, of the nature of capitalist society as a whole, and of their mission in history. They must act consciously for their class interests. They must become conscious of the fact that these class interests lead to a socialist society. When this takes place, the workers are a class for themselves, a class with socialist consciousness.

In our work-places, workers try to get better wages and working conditions from the employer. If we cannot get them by a simple request, we soon learn the need of union organization with which to enforce our requests and to defend ourselves from attacks by the employer. We learn, too, that workers must resort to political action in order to advance our interests. We and all other workers are forced by capitalism to engage in the class struggle. The Socialist Party is needed to win the working class to the principles of socialism, to so-called socialist methods of struggle against capitalist exploitation and oppression, and finally to the socialist victory itself. Socialism will never come by itself. Of course, there are many other parties which proclaim the same goal which is confusing to a worker. He or she will say: “How am I to tell which party is the right one for me to join or support?” Or, “Why don’t all those who are in favour of socialism unite into a single party?” Or, “If you cannot agree among yourselves, how do you expect me to agree with any of you?” To judge the different parties, it is necessary to check on their words and their deeds. That is, to examine the policies of the different parties, what they are for and what they are against, and to see if what they do in practice corresponds to what they say in words. On that basis, it is easy to conclude which one best serves the interests of socialism.

The Socialist Party calls itself a Marxist party. The name merely signify that the Socialist Party stands firmly on the basic principles of one the greatest teachers in the history of the working class. The Socialist Party was formed in 1904. But its roots reach much further back. As a Marxist organisation the Socialist Party champions revolutionary ideas. What is a social revolution? The socialist revolution is simply the overthrow of capitalist despotism and the establishment of workers’ rule. People Power. Socialism cannot be achieved, and the workers cannot effectively promote their interests, without class consciousness. Class consciousness means an understanding working class, a self-confident and self-reliant working class.

The road to freedom is marked out by the principles of socialism, and no other road exists.

What is slavery?

The centralisation of the control of property in a few hands is increasing threatening the existence of civilisation.

Some scornfully sneer at the Socialist Party because they say we are “idealists.” Some others claim that we are as a whole “pretty good fellows,” but utterly “impractical.” Now, what is socialism? One day in the near future the hungry millions will turn against the overfed few. In his historic work, The Condition of the Working Class in England, Engels wrote in 1844:

“Both legally and actually, the worker is the slave of the possessing class, the bourgeoisie; so much so that he is sold in the market like a commodity whose price is subject to rise and fall like that of any other commodity. If there is an increased demand for workers, their price goes up; if there is a decreased demand, the price goes down; if the demand has so decreased that a certain number of workers find no buyer of their labour-power, as ‘surplus stock’, then they have to lie in reserve, and thus earning no livelihood, they perish from starvation. For, to speak in terms of political economy, the money spent on their maintenance will not ‘reproduce itself’, will be money wasted, and no capitalist will thus invest his money. The whole difference from the old, avowed slavery, consists in that the modern worker is seemingly free; because he is not sold once and for all time, but by instalments, by the day, by the week, or by the year, and also because he is not sold by one owner to another, but is forced to sell himself; for, he is not the slave of one man, but of the whole possessing class. This means no substantial difference to him, and while this illusory liberty should afford him some amount of real liberty, there is, on the other hand, the further handicap in his present position that no one guarantees him the means of subsistence, and the bourgeoisie may any day deprive him of his employment and doom him to starvation, should it have no use for his labour nor for his existence. On the other hand, to the bourgeoisie the present state of affairs is infinitely more advantageous than the old slavery. It may discharge its workpeople whenever it pleases, without losing thereby any capital investment for, generally, labour is now bought cheaper by the bourgeoisie than the cost of labour would be under the old slavery system, as it had been reassuringly calculated by Adam Smith”

Engels a few years later in his pamphlet, Principles of Communism, which constituted the first draft of the Communist Manifesto. He puts there the question, wherein do proletarians differ from slaves? And his answer is as follows:

“The slave is sold once and forever. The proletarian as to sell himself each day, and each hour. The slave is the property of his master, and already on account of the personal interest of the latter, enjoys an assured existence, however miserable. Each individual proletarian is, so to speak, the property of the whole bourgeois class. His labour is purchased only when required, and therefore, his existence is not assured. There is an assured existence only to the working class as a whole. The slave had no competition to contend with; the proletarian is subject to competition and price fluctuations. The slave is considered a thing, and not a member of bourgeois society. The proletarian is considered a person and a member of bourgeois society. The slave may live under better conditions than the proletarian, but the proletarian belongs to a society standing on a higher level of development, and is himself on a higher level than the slave. The slave may liberate himself by abolishing, among all the forms of private property, only that of slavery; whereas the proletarian can liberate himself only by abolishing private property in general”.

Many years later Marx, wrote the following on this subject: “Only the form in which surplus labour is squeezed out of the immediate producers – the workers – distinguishes the economic social formations; for instance, the society based on slavery from the society of hired labour”. (Capital, Vol.1)

Of course, the people who exploit the working class do not recognise the correctness of this state of wage slavery. The reformists cited two points supposed to prove that the proletariat was no longer in a state of slavery. 1) the growth of democracy and the extension of the political rights of the proletariat, and 2) that owing to the existence of the trade unions, owing to the political struggle of the proletariat, there was an improvement in the condition of the proletariat, wage increases, increased social insurance, and labour protection. After the war, the reformists added the growing participation of the proletariat in the management of industry, the introduction of the so-called “industrial democracy”. The reformists triumphantly point to the statement made by Engels that when labour power, as a commodity, becomes unsalable and is laid up in stock, the worker has to die of starvation. Well, they say, is it so to-day? And they tell us about the existence of unemployment benefits. Yes, in a number of countries the bourgeoisie was forced to introduce the welfare system for the unemployment. Such is the case in countries where the proletariat forms a majority of the population, where the bourgeoisie is afraid lest the unemployed, suffering the pangs of hunger, throw off the yoke of capitalism. Only in Western countries the bourgeoisie has paid a sort of ransom to the workers in the shape of paltry sums for the relief of the unemployed. In countries where the proletarian masses do not as yet reveal any revolutionary tendencies on a large scale, there is either no relief at all for unemployed workers or it amounts to a miserable pittance.

However, even in countries where the proletariat has won the benefits of social services against unemployment the bourgeoisie have inaugurated a furious attack upon this “luxury”. It asserts that it can no longer “maintain” the unemployed, that the insurance contributions are a heavy burden on accumulated capital and on the cost of production, thus diminishing the competitive ability of the manufacturers. The bourgeois press, all the bourgeois spokesman, including the most progressive amongst them, are screaming about the extravagant living of the proletariat, claiming that the paltry payment received, at best, by unemployed worker in the wealthiest capitalist countries constitutes an unheard of luxury which capitalism cannot afford. The proletarians of ancient society – says Marx – lived at the expense of that society, which relied on slave labour. Modern society lives at the expense of the hired labour of the proletarians. And this very society, which would not be able to live through a single day without exploiting the workers, turns around and says to the proletariat: “you will have to shift yourself, I can no longer afford to feed you”.

While Marx and Engels characterised the condition of the proletariat under capitalism as a form of exploitation that does not differ from slavery in substance, the condition of the proletariat in the period of moribund capitalism is daily becoming more and more identical with the condition of slaves. In the midst of untold wealth, millions upon millions of people are starving in the civilised capitalist countries, not to speak of the millions who literally die from hunger in the countries ruined by capitalism. The worker is tied to the machine which allows him not a single moment for thoughtful reflection, for human sentiments. He comes back from the factory, completely worn out and incapable of anything else than to stagger into the “movie” or the public-house. He is not individually owned as a slave, but as a class, he is collectively enmeshed in the huge capitalist machine, which ruthlessly crushes him and breaks his bones at the least attempt of resistance. The capitalist State becomes not merely the organ of domination over the working class, but it becomes the organ of civil war; because the worker does not want to remain the slave of the capitalists. Capitalism has placed upon the backs of the working class the whole burden of labour and has deprived it of all the joys of life; now the capitalist cannot imagine labour in any other way than under brutal compulsion. In the 19^th century an African native who had returned from England explained : “The English are the same slaves as ourselves. They are compelled to work by hunger; and we, by our masters”. The slave-owners took the same view of slave labour that the capitalists are taking today of “free” capitalist labour, which is, that no one will work unless driven by hunger. The greatest philosopher of the slave-driving world, Aristotle, wrote that “the trades are akin to slavery; a man of honour, a man of social standing, a good citizen, should learn no trade; for he will cease then to be a gentleman, and the slaves will cease to be slaves”. Even the management of slaves was considered by Aristotle to be an unworthy pursuit for a freeman: “It contains in itself nothing beautiful, and nothing to excite respect. Gentlemen who can dispense with such worries, shift them on to their managers. For themselves they choose the pursuit of politics and philosophy”.

Sing a song of capitalism

The December 1994 issue of the Socialist Standard

In Glasgow and Edinburgh pubs on a Saturday evening you may hear some workers, under the influence of a couple of drinks, giving voice to sentimental patriotic songs. "Scotland I Adore Thee" and "Hail, Caledonia" may be aired until the bartender or some other music lover puts a stop to the proceedings.

But what is the truth behind all this patriotic drivel? According to the BBC2 programme Whose Country is it Anyway? (26 October) Scotland, like every other country, is owned by a handful of people:

"Sixty per cent of the land in Scotland, with a population of over 5 million is owned by only 1,500 people."

So next Saturday evening when you feel moved to imitate Kenneth McKellar with a version of "My Granny's Hielan' Hovel", remember who really owns Scotland - the capitalist class.

You may well "Belong to Glasgow", but Glasgow like every city in the world belongs to them.

SOCIALISM NOW !

Socialism maintains that there can be no fundamental change in the living conditions of the people while a minority holds economic power in the natural resources and in the right to exploit the majority for personal gain. Socialists insist that the basis of exploitation — the use of men and women for individual profit and power — lie in the capitalist system. Reforms do not remove the villain of the piece from the scene of action. A true socialist society must be change from a capitalist system of ownership, exploitation and control to one of common ownership, administration and control of the affairs by all men and women who produce its wealth. Socialists do not want bloody revolution. Revolution means change. There have been revolutions in art, industry and social relations which have not caused bloodshed. One of the most widespread misconceptions about socialism is that it is a doctrine of nationalisation and state ownership, where a bureaucracy controls everything – like it was in the Soviet Union and Eastern Europe. This myth was also believed and encouraged by many who call themselves Marxists who called countries like Russia and Poland ‘socialist’ simply on the grounds that their economies were owned by the government.

The socialist movement has always aimed to take the means of production and distribution out of the hands of individuals and to transfer them to the ownership of the people as a whole, so that they can be used for the common good. Social ownership is production to meet the people’s needs instead of production for private profit. Social ownership means an end to the chaos and wasteful competition of production for profit and the development of new productive resources to provide what people really want. Socialism does not mean the levelling down of living standards. Nor does it bring bureaucracy and tyranny. On the contrary, socialism draws more and more people into planning and making their own future, and frees their creative energies for great economic, social and cultural advances. The scientific and technical knowledge we already possess, when given free rein for the benefit of all, can bring a far higher standard of living than we have today. But in order to build socialism, the dominant position of the rich must be ended. Political power must be taken from the hands of the capitalist minority, and firmly grasped by the majority of the people, the working class. The change to socialism, therefore, means that the industrial enterprises must be taken over by the people, and production organised and planned not for profit but for use. Socialism will be possible only when the workers, those who meet the needs of society, decide that they are determined to lay down the foundations of a whole new future of humanity. The class struggle is important and cannot be avoided because it marks the road towards the class-less society. With the end of class oppression the state disappears.

Parliament may have lost much of its prestige but its control over the forces of law and order, the armed forces, education and a, number of other services means that it cannot be ignored. The seeds of the socialist society are growing right in the soil of capitalist society itself. Poverty, unemployment, industrial crises and wars are not the product of the machinations of politicians but the rotten fruits of the capitalist system. They are the stink weeds of the capitalist system. They smell to high heaven. Conditions make the workers learn the lessons of socialism and conditions compel the masses to strive for a better social system. Conditions have been the workers’ best teacher, and conditions have shaken the faith in the system. The apologists of every social system that has passed into history have always sought to justify its continuance by saying: “It’s the best yet.” Doubtless the patricians of the doomed Roman Empire used that limping argument, also the feudal lords, and now the whitewashers of capitalism. But human progress continues only by mankind looking forward – not back. Socialism will be the order of society but totally depends on what the working class does. Its struggle for socialism cannot be postponed.

Brazil Destroys It's Resources!

The New York Times (October 18) reported on on the worst drought in Brazil's history. Huge reservoirs are depleted and water rationing is in place in Rio, Sao Paulo and other cities. Experts are looking at the rapid deforestation in South America as the culprit. Cutting down forests releases carbon dioxide into the atmosphere and increases global warming. Forests also absorb more solar energy than grasslands and release vast amounts of water vapour driving the rainfall amounts. Each fully grown tree releases one thousand litres of water a day and the entire Amazon rain forest sends up twenty billion tons a day, more water than the mighty river itself. But these staggering figures and the common sense they should engender are ignored in the race for profits and the need to keep up with the competition that is the crazy mantra of the capitalist mode of production. Brazil must destroy its resources or be left behind. Sooner or later, the world's ninety-nine per cent will take over! John Ayers

Capitalism's Real Bank Crisis

Food bank use in Scotland has increased to record levels, with more than 60,000 referrals over a six-month period, according to a charity. Delays in receiving benefits was the most common reason cited for financial hardship.

Capitalism's Economic Law

Under slave society the source of profit was easy to see: the slaves worked while the slave owners led a life of luxury on the products of their toil. Under feudalism the source of profit was also easily seen. The serf worked for so many days on his own land and for so many days on the land of the landlord. Under capitalism the source of profit is hidden by the wage workers receive. It appears that the workers receive the full return on their day’s labour. The complicated nature of modern capitalist society clouds the issue. The capitalist class and its hired lackeys spread erroneous ideas as to the source of profit.

One illusion spread by them is that money itself the source of profit. This reflects itself in the expression, “money makes money”. This is not strictly true. If we, for example, were to heap a pile of sovereigns and silver in a room, it would remain the same amount for hundreds of years. Another more popular and more insidious idea spread by the boss is that machines are the source of profit. If, again, we were to put machines and a large quantity of raw material into a factory, it would not make a profit if it remained there until doomsday.

The real source of capitalist profits lies in the unpaid labour time of the workers — that portion of the working day over and above tie time it takes the worker to produce value equal to the value of the necessities of life. The worker under capitalism has only one thing to sell in order to live: his or her labour power, or ability to work. Unlike the tradesman or artisan of feudal society, (such as the boot-maker, weaver, etc) the worker of capitalism has no tools, nor could he compete with capitalism. So he is reduced to selling the one commodity he has: his labour power.

Labour power, like all other commodities, has a certain price. But price is only a monetary expression of value. It may go up or down a bit, depending on supply and demand. The one thing common to all commodities is that they are the product of human labour. The necessities of life, the food we eat, the clothes we wear, the trains in which we travel, the house in which we live, even money itself, are the products of human labour. As human labour is the one thing common to all commodities, it is this and only this that can serve as a measure of value. So we can say that full value of a commodity is determined by the amount of socially necessary labour spent in its production.

The capitalist buys the machines and raw material necessary to start production. Then he buys the commodity labour power and puts it to work. While this labour power is being used it creates a value greater than its own, greater than the value of food, clothing and shelter necessary to reproduce itself.

It could be that in about the first four hours of work the worker earns the necessities of life; that is, he produces value equals to these things. But he does not stop working. If he did, the boss would not make a profit. The worker must keep working right up to tile knock-off bell. It is this additional time of labour, this section of the working day for which the worker receives no remittance, that supplies the capitalist with his profit. Division of the working day — surplus value Therefore, in a working day of eight hours, the worker labours, say, for four hours to supply himself with the necessities of life and for the remaining four hours he labours for the enrichment of the boss.

This is the source of capitalist profit. It is this fact of the unpaid section of the working day that the boss hides from the working people by all the devious means at his disposal. He denies it when it suits him to and when he can no longer deny it he distorts it. He hires his intellectual stooges from academia for the purpose of refuting these facts and covering up his profits.

Lengthening of the working day is an obvious way the capitalist sees to increase his surplus is to lengthen the working day. Supposing the working day was increased to 10 hours, it would still take, say, four hours to produce the necessities of life, but instead the boss receiving four hours surplus labour (as at present) he would receive six hours. This is why the shipping companies and their spokesmen are such good advocates of the 44-hour week. They would revert to an even longer working week if the organised strength of trade unions did not stand in their way.

Reducing necessary labour time Another way they can increase their profits is by reducing the necessary labour time (that section of the working day in which the worker produces the necessities of life). Supposing they reduced the necessary time from four hours to two hours, that would give them six hours surplus labour time of value without increasing the length of the working day. They can achieve this reduction by the introduction of techniques, machines, etc, that speed up the process of work — by automation.

The favourite method of reducing the necessary labour time is that of speed-up. This drastically reduces the necessary part of the working day, as it does not take the workers as long to produce goods to the value of the necessities of life and again increases the surplus value for the boss.

Throughout the 19th century there raged what Marx called “a protracted civil war” — the hours struggle between labour and capital. It still exists today. The capitalist buys the labour power of the workers at as low a price (wages) as he can. He reasons that by working his employees for as many hours as are physically possible, he will make the most profitable use of this labour power. On the other hand, the worker who has sold his labour power is interested in short hours. The drive for maximum profits completely obsesses the employing class. They cannot under any circumstances be content with a good profit, nor a high profit nor a record profit.

It must be the maximum profit. This is the fundamental law that governs all their behaviour. Driven on blindly by that dynamic law, they are prepared to deal ruthlessly with anything or anybody standing in the way of their maximum profits.

Telling People All They require To Exist

In 1995 the then Conservative government of Ontario gutted the provinces welfare system. The social services minister claimed that a single person could exist on a food budget of $90.21. He even included a list of what could be bought for that amount but forgot things like butter for the bread and sauce for the pasta, among other wonders. Since then, inflation has risen forty-five percent but when a social worker recently tried to buy the same list, he found this 'welfare diet' had spiked one hundred and seven per cent to $189.91. The Conservatives were ousted and the governing Liberals have spent a decade of yearly rate increases but have failed, obviously to get back to pre-1995 levels. In fact, since the Liberals began increases welfare rates have increased just thirty-one per cent, below even the official inflation rate. You can cut this any way you like but there is only one way to solve this - and many other inequality problems – free access for all to all goods and services available. John Ayers.

Agitate! Educate! Organise!

What are we out for? Nothing less than a social revolution, a complete transformation of human society.  That is no little thing. It is about the biggest job that anybody have ever set their minds to. And what are our means - people like ourselves. The emancipation of the working class must be the work of the working-class themselves. There is no other way. It is in that of building up a class-conscious Socialist Party that we bend our efforts towards. Agitate! Educate! Organise! Are we, as is sometimes alleged, too purist, too sectarian or too intolerant? Are we too antagonistic, not to enemies, but to would-be comrades? Do we seek to distance people rather than to win them over? These are searching questions to which it may be worthwhile to give some consideration. In things doubtful, liberty of thought; in things essential, unity; and in all things, charity. Our task is to disarm hostility and to bring together all potential comrades into a united harmonious Socialist Party.

Capitalism is where the people are herded into factories and offices to get the wherewithal to live, while the product of their labour is appropriated by the industrial barons and the lords of capital who possess the right to exploit, the right to rob, the right to over-produce and cause crises, the right to compete, and cause wars. This is the cause of all social ills, and the answer is the abolition of private property, and instead the common ownership of the means of production, so that all may enjoy the fruit of their labour. We want to see society changed. We want to see it transformed from a thing of wars and recessions, to a real brotherhood of man. Sociaists work for the improvement of the conditions of the people. Our understanding of society and history teaches us that improvement can only be attained by changing basic social relations, by a shift in ownership and control from the few to the many, an all-embracing socialization of the means of production and distribution.

Capitalism having enormously developed the productive processes on a social basis, has reached the stage when, because of the private ownership of those processes, the system has become a fetter on production itself. The day has passed for patching up the capitalist system; it must go. Because only a small section of the population controls production and is not answerable to the rest of the community and because this section is competing within its own ranks and with similar classes abroad, it means either the excruciating suffering of repeated slumps or the ultimate threat of total annihilation for the whole world. Our answer to this threat of total annihilation is socialism. Substituting a programme of reforms within capitalist society for the abolition of capitalism and the establishment of socialism is surrender and political suicide. This is betrayal of the socialist objective harking back to the Second International. Reformists put forward utopian demands for the reconstruction of the capitalist economic system in order that the replacement of the capitalist mode of production will be unnecessary and capitalist society itself can be saved. Socialism does not involve re-distribution and any sharing out of the means of production and exchange. It is the socialisation of the whole economy. Today we face the choice between “a revolutionary reconstitution of society” or “the common ruin of the contending classes.”

The essence of the capitalist system is the ownership and control of the materials and tools of production and distribution by a small class whose legal title to the lands, forests, mines, railroads, quarries, mills, factories, and other industrial and commercial utilities and plants gives them control over the lives of the working masses. The workers subsist in a new form of slavery, wherein labor power is paid for by wages, and the bare chance to live depends upon employment by some capitalist master. Employment depends upon the production by the worker of a margin of value over and above what he receives for his labour power. The capitalist master has no liability on account of the wage-worker, except that of payment for labour-power on a time or piece basis. Capitalism has nothing to offer the large majority but uncertainty for tomorrow, unemployment, environmental disasters, poverty and war.

Capitalism knows no national boundaries and encompasses all the world’s countries and peoples. The ruling class of the different states fight for control and hegemony to exploit countries, people and resources all over the globe. The struggle of the working class is also international, even if the working class of each country first must do away with their own bourgeoisie. The working class is the only revolutionary class under capitalism. It is the historical task of the working class to put an end to capitalist exploitation and oppression.

Capitalism inevitably produces exploitation and poverty, war, poisonous environmental pollution, and waste of human and natural resources, none of which can be consistently eliminated without the socialist transformation of society. Like all the other political parties which exist the Socialist Party is the political party of a definite class. It is the political party of the working class and works in its interests as opposed to others which are parties of the rich and which work for the continuation of capitalist exploitation and wage-slavery. The goal is to overthrow the dictatorship of the ruling class and establish socialism, thus ending the exploitation of man by man.

Trying To Outdo The Leftish Party

At "The Word on the Street" book fair that SPC members attended on September 27, the so-called communist party were handing out literature, most of which was about what they would do if elected. Some of these pearls of wisdom were – raise the minimum wage to $20 per hour; employment benefits to be at ninety per cent of previous earnings for all workers; nationalize banking and insurance; reverse privatization of all programs and services: no new fighter jets; cut the military budget by seventy-five per cent; progressive tax reform based on ability to pay; double the corporate tax rate; invest heavily to create jobs by expanding renewable energy and conservation programs. There were many other proposals but this should be enough to show anyone where the CP stand. So, if elected, there would still be money, wages, taxes corporations, banks, military etc. All of which are a part of a private property-based society. So the CP are trying to outdo the leftish New Democratic Party and are vying to run capitalism. Nowhere do they advocate changing the economic base of society where the majority control the tools of production and run a system in the interests of all. John Ayers.

Socialism is just the beginning

We live in a world rife with misery and oppression in various forms. Hunger, poverty, unemployment, racial and sexual discrimination, and many forms of repression, from the restriction of the most basic democratic rights like freedom of speech and association to hideous barbarism like torture and genocide, are still the lot of the majority of the people of the world. Now even the existence of the human species has been put at risk by the rapacious demands made upon the planet’s resources.  Far from lessening with the progress of science and technology, the various forms of misery endured by the masses are growing and the gulf between the rich and the poor, between the powerful and the dispossessed, is steadily widening. Ever since the first class societies, the exploited have aspired to a better life where the living conditions of all would be in keeping with society’s ability to use the wealth of nature. They have yearned for a society where all injustice would be banished forever, a society with no trace of corruption, a society in which the weak would no longer be oppressed by the strong, a society in which one class would no longer be exploited by another. Humanity has reached a turning point in its history. The dreams of the past have become real possibilities for a future that can already be foreseen, because the material conditions necessary for achieving them are growing steadily. Only a socialist revolution can put an end to the capitalist relations of exploitation that are now the fundamental obstacle to further progress for mankind. This is the meaning of the struggle for a society of abundance, of justice and of freedom.

Capitalists have only one reason for existence – to accumulate more and more capital. They are therefore always looking for ways to increase the productivity of labour. Capitalists seek to increase the productivity of workers. They impose speed-ups and compulsory overtime. They multiply their attacks on the democratic rights of working people and continually try to control their organizations and even to destroy them.  The State is controlled entirely by, and in the service of, the capitalist class. It results in a very keen competition among capitalists themselves; many are reduced to bankruptcy, while a minority get richer and richer. Capitalism has created the very conditions for its own destruction. The spread of capitalist production has resulted in the growth of the size, cohesion, and revolt of the working class, the only thoroughly revolutionary class. With the abolition of capitalist exploitation, the workers are the only class that has everything to gain and nothing to lose but its chains. The working class cannot free itself without freeing all of humanity at the same time, because the ultimate goal of its struggle is not to replace the power of one class with that of another but rather to abolish all classes. This is the only way to put an end to all the social divisions and inequalities that have characterized class societies thus far. Capitalism, undermined by its own contradictions, will inevitably be overthrown, just as all previous systems of class exploitation, including slavery and feudalism, have been. The working class has the mission of carrying this task out to its ultimate conclusion: the abolition of class society.

The development of productive forces is fundamental to the emergence of socialism. It will permit a steady reduction in the human work needed to produce goods. Socialist society is based on the free association of all individuals who work together to produce the goods necessary for their collective well-being. All will work according to their capacities and their needs will be fully satisfied. Thus, individuals will no longer be governed by the division of labour and all opposition between city and countryside and between manual and intellectual work will be eliminated. The abolition of classes will also mean the elimination of the roots of women’s oppression at last. Only socialism and the expropriation of the capitalists and the socialization of the means of production will lead directly to the abolition of society divided into classes with opposing interests. The abolition of classes will in turn lead to the withering away of the State, and its extinction. The State is not, and can never be, anything other than the instrument of dictatorship of one class over others.

The fundamental interests of the workers are the same throughout the world. The socialist revolution is inseparable from a world revolution. Socialism itself is only possible in a world totally rid of capitalist exploitation. After we have overthrown the socialism will mean the rule of the people. It will put an end to the exploitation of man by man. It will bring freedom to all those oppressed by capital and open up a new period of history for all peoples. Gone will be the anarchy of capitalist production. Gone, too, its resultant economic crises which today bring so much misery to workers. The enormous waste of capitalism will be abolished. There will be no more billions in profits squandered by the bourgeoisie. There will be no more destruction of goods and productive forces as there is today in times of crisis. We will also have socialist relations of production to replace the capitalist organisation of labour. The repressive system of bosses and supervisors who today control the workers, will be wiped out. Workers will participate in the running of their work-places and factories by electing the administration and drawing up coordinated plans via local, regional and worldwide advisory committees. Socialism represents an enormous historical advance over capitalism. It is the future of humanity, a radically new society where classes and the state will have been completely eliminated. The state is simply an instrument by which one class dominates another. It became a necessity when society split into classes. Just as the ancient slave state served the slave owners to suppress the countless slave rebellions, so too the modern capitalist state is a tool of the bourgeoisie to maintain its dictatorship over the working class. No longer will there be capitalists siphoning profits and no more destruction of the productive forces.

Socialism is not an end to human development but just the beginning – the beginning of a further development of production, the people’s well-being and all facets of human society.

You Win Some, You Lose Some

Discussing the Trans Pacific Partnership, Tony Burman (Toronto Star, Oct. 10) reports the World Bank as stating that the number of people living in extreme poverty world wide has dropped below ten per cent for the first time, but added that 900 million still live on less than $2 a day. On the other hand, UNICEF reported that in the world's most affluent countries the number of minors living in poverty has increased to 76 million. You win some, you lose some in capitalism's casino economy. John Ayers.

Modest Goals

As an example of what nations are doing, developing nations are being called to address their contributions to climate change. In addition, Barack Obama has announced a plan to reduce carbon emissions from power industries by 32% from 2005 levels by 2030. China expects emissions to peak by 2030 and expects plans to be in place by 2017 for emission reductions. These are only goals and are very modest and subject to all kinds of opposition and trimming, so do not hold your breath! John Ayers.