Our
society is divided. Our planet is under threat. Our communities are
suffering. The interconnected environmental, energy, economic, and
inequality crises of the 21st century are posing complex and
often-unpredictable challenges to communities around the world. It’s
time to build. Meaningful change will not happen until we adopt a
world-view that seeks to change the root causes of the many
social ills that afflict present-day society.
Hunger,
poverty and pollution are not technical problems in and of
themselves, since solutions already exist to technically solve and
provide for each of these. Our greatest challenge isn’t the
technical application of solutions to create abundance for the
world’s population. It is persuading and convincing our
fellow-workers that these are feasible and socialism is possible.
This task of education to instill awareness is so massive and
important that it cannot be understated.
Today,
there are repetitive occupations which simply do not need to exist
given the state of automation and robotics. Not only would automation
reduce the mundane burden and allow more free time for people, it
also would, more importantly, increase productivity. Machines do not
need breaks, vacations, sleep, etc.. The use of mechanization on its
own means to create many forms of abundance on this planet, from food
to physical goods. However, to do this, the wage-labour system we
have must end. The reality is that the wages system is stifling
progress in its requirement to make profits for the employing class.
The
concept of property is a fairly new social concept. Before the
neolithic revolution, as extrapolated from current hunter and
gatherer societies existing today, property relationships did not
exist as we know them. Neither did money. Communities existed in an
egalitarian fashion, living within the carrying capacity of their
regions and the natural production built in. It was only after direct
agricultural development was discovered, eventually proceeding with
resource acquisition by ship traders and the like - up to modern day
power establishments and corporations - that property became a highly
defined staple of society as we know it today.
There
is growing view among environmentalists that the affluent regions of
the global economy must dramatically reduce overall resource and
energy consumption levels – that is, undergo a process of
‘degrowth’ – if humanity is to bring about a sustainable world
order. On the other hand, we have a growth economy that cannot go two
steps in this direction without causing huge economic and social
problems. As well as there are vast numbers of poor who require to be
brought up to decent levels of living standards. If
we need to degrow the economy, as it appears we do, how is that done
without causing utter social chaos and societal breakdown?
The World Socialist Movement say it must be done by creating a
rational steady-state economy.
Our
present system is the capitalist market economy.
This system has
certain defining features that mark it out as unique compared to
other economic systems humans have devised. It is a system in
which a) most (if not all) the major means of production are
privately (these days corporately) owned by a small minority of the
population; and b) where the fundamental economic problems
(what, how, and for whom to produce) are solved
“automatically”, through the price mechanism, rather than through
conscious social decisions.
Most importantly
the system is also characterised by a growth
compulsion, to expand.
Due to competition, all firms – particularly large shareholder
firms – are under constant pressure to invest in new techniques,
methods of production and products, to improve competitiveness and
their sales figures. If they fail to do this, they not only risk
profits margins but also eventually being taken-over by other firms,
or made bankrupt. Since no firm wants to perish, and since all must
expand if they want to continue to exist, a general growth compulsion
arises, not just for individual firms, but for the macro economy as
whole.
So,
while almost everyone wants growth,
it is also true that the system needs growth
for its basic functioning.
In
fact, the system cannot possibly tolerate even a slow-down in the
rate of growth, let alone a contraction. The famed ‘efficiency’
of the market system only works well (if at all) when there is a
buyers’ market, leading to strong competition between suppliers to
meet customer demand. But in a contraction scenario, most markets
would be ‘suppliers’ markets, as there would be, in general, a
shortage of supply relative to demand. This would mean even poorly
run, high cost firms would be able to survive. And, as with any
market economy, you would still have a situation where increasingly
scarce resources were tended to be allocated to meeting the money
backed demands of the already wealthy, rather than to meeting the
vital needs for all – a recipe for social chaos in a context of
heightened scarcity.
When
capitalism approaches a ‘steady state’ of zero GDP growth the
outcome for society at large is ugly. The situation is characterised
by capital destruction, mass unemployment, devastated communities,
growing poverty, foreclosures, homelessness and environmental
considerations shunted aside in the all-out effort to restore growth.
Herman
Daly argues that we can do so, while retaining a basically capitalist
system, on the condition that the state steps in to play a far more
active regulatory role than at present. Daly proposes that the state
impose escalating resource depletion quotes, that can be traded in a
market, while retaining private enterprise and the market system.
Socialists
argue, however, that this will not work. The contraction of the
economies of the world must occur in an orderly way. Otherwise there
will be unbearable breakdowns of whole societies. An orderly
contraction can only take place in a planned economy, not in a
capitalist market economy. A planned economy can consciously use
labour-intensive technologies and methods, if necessary, which result
in less use of resources.
A
socialist economic framework will be necessary if we are to contract
the economy in an orderly, peaceful and socially just way.
In
arguing for large-scale industrial planning, we are not saying that
we should nationalise family farms, local artisans, groceries,
bakeries, neighbourhood restaurants and repair shops, workers’
cooperatives, and so on. Small producers aren’t destroying the
world. But large-scale corporations are. If we want to save the
planet, the corporations would have to be socialised, and completely
reorganised and repurposed. This
will be based on the active participation and cooperation of most, if
not all, ordinary citizens.
Active
and inclusive participation by all (or at least most) is a
crucial pre-requisite
and it simply
cannot be imposed ‘top-down’ via the State even if it wanted
to. The
revolution happens when ordinary citizens take it upon themselves to
start building the new world. Unless participants within the
socialist movement become aware of, and begin advocating, the
eventual need for an orderly process of revolution it will not
achieve a sustainable society.
Capitalism
itself must go onto the trash-can of history.
Socialists must
doggedly go on raising awareness wherever we can. Even if it does not
feel like it, every conversation counts.
The
Socialist Party understands the true nature of the challenges we as a
society face, what
the underlying, systemic forces are at play. Acting without this
understanding is like putting a band-aid on a life-threatening
injury. The Socialist Party supports the principle, according to one
religious idiom, all God’s children deserve a fair share of the
Earth’s bounty.
Let
us openly and loudly declare our commitment to the death of poverty
and the birth of socialism. Onward to the cooperative
commonwealth.
