Thursday, March 21, 2019

A life worth living for all


The inability of seemingly powerful and well-entrenched liberal and left parties to prevent the triumph of right-wing reaction has been a bitter pill to swallow. The conditions have aggravated the sense of working-class political impotence. Forced to abandon their traditional beliefs and failing to find satisfactory alternatives, the workers have become easy prey to demagogy and trickery. As standards of human existence deteriorate these factors will not contribute to clearer thinking by the workers.

Capitalism is insane. It cannot work efficiently— it can't work at all! The Socialist Party does not direct its appeal for the establishment of socialism to the capitalists. We know it would be worse than useless. No ruling class ever gave up its power of domination without being forced to do so. Make no mistake about it, when the master class are confronted with a serious attack upon the private property institution no abstract “civil rights” will prevent them using all the might at their command to maintain their power. The appeal of the Socialist Party is directed to the working class because this class has everything to gain by the acceptance of socialist principles. At this stage the question arises as to the means to be employed against the might of the ruling class. We assert that the workers must look to themselves to get out of capitalist conditions. While it is true that the master class use their power to consolidate their domination of the working class, it is also true that this power has been handed to them by the latter. In other words, at every election the workers have voted the capitalists into power. It is as though the lamb delivered itself over to the lion. The workers must understand that they can use this political weapon in the interest of themselves. They must study socialism wherein they will learn the cause of their subjection, how they are subjected, and the means by which they can combine their forces as a class and use their might to ensure the right to live a comfortable and healthy life.

It is true that the workers control in politics, in the sense that they have a majority of the total votes; but once they have voted that power, either to Coalitionists, Liberals or Labour Leaders, their control is gone, and the party they vote into office wields the full power of the State. The workers can only use the power that their number gives them when they consciously organise for a specific object and send their own representatives to the national and local assemblies for the accomplishment of that object. The whole question of slavery or freedom centres around this point: will the workers continue to allow themselves to be led, or will they direct the affairs of life in their common interest, through representatives selected and appointed by themselves? They can only do the latter when they are in agreement as to the object of their political activities. The only object, correctly understood, on which all workers could agree is the socialist object. The establishment of a system of society based on the common ownership and democratic control of all the means of wealth production. The task for every socialist is, therefore, to help in the work of making more socialists.

Before a socialist revolution can take place a majority of the working class must understand and accept the essentials of socialism and organise to establish it. This understanding not only renders “leaders” unnecessary, it forbids their existence. The working class will keep control in its own hands and administrators will have to carry out the workers’ instructions. To talk of a “socialist revolution” as being “led by socialists” is at once to proclaim one’s entire ignorance of even the elements of socialism.  Capitalism itself rests upon ignorance, and its political parties, with their symbols and slogans, their banners and big drums, are all up to their necks in it. The mass of the people are taken in by the ballyhoo. They support the system of private property for the flimsiest of reasons and never seriously consider the proposition that there is a better way of running the world. As long as such ideas keep their grip, the world will remain in confusion. Apart from anything else, democracy will always be unsafe. Both Labour and Conservative parties support this chaos of ignorance. Beside that momentous fact, what does it really matter which has the bigger posters, or the more press advertisements, or bangs the bigger drum?

Only socialism can guarantee the conditions of a life worth living for all. Because its establishment depends upon an understanding of the necessary social changes by a majority of the population, these changes cannot be left to parties acting apart from or above the workers. The workers cannot vote for Socialism as they do for reformist policies and then go home or go to work and carry on as usual. To put the matter in this way is to show its absurdity. Socialist ideas are not acquired merely by the experience of hardships and tragedy under capitalism. They must be propagated and learned. The party of the workers, therefore, cannot be anything less than a socialist party; its task, the conversion of the working class to the principles of socialism. Nor can it at present be much more. It must eschew all the cheap tricks of electioneering and propaganda; whether these consist of open support for capitalism on the plea of "urgent" problems, or a futile appeal for "a socialist Britain now." Such activities will not bring socialism any nearer; the workers who support them are only postponing or evading their real responsibility. That they do so is not due to any evil machinations or secret plots by these power-seeking parties. On the contrary, the existence of these organisations and the popularity of their illusory remedies is conditioned by the inadequacy of working-class political understanding. So long as the workers do not comprehend the necessity and meaning of a revolutionary social change, they will have no choice but to leave their fate in the hands of "parties" and "leaders." With the development of socialist consciousness (class-consciousness) will come the realisation that they, the workers themselves, must take
control of society. Knowing what has to be done will give them the will and assurance needed. The Socialist Party therefore reject all comparison with other political parties. We do not ask for power; we help to educate the working-class itself into taking it.

Wednesday, March 20, 2019

Who owns Scotland?

A study by the Scottish Land Commission found that about 1,125 owners, including Highland lairds and major public bodies such as Forest Enterprise and the National Trust for Scotland, own 70% of Scotland’s rural land, covering more than 4.1m hectares (10m acres) of countryside.

That includes 87 owners whose holdings total 1.7m ha, with some estates owned by the same family for more than 400 years. Scotland’s two most powerful private landowners – the Danish clothing billionaire Anders Holch Povlsen and his wife Anne; and the Duke of Buccleuch – each own more than 80,000 ha (200,000 acres), spread across multiple properties.

The Forestry Commission owns 638,600 ha and the National Trust for Scotland, a conservation charity, which owns 76,000 ha.

Scotland’s land ownership registry was badly out of date and only covered 33% of the country’s land area.

The Church of England has quietly become Scotland’s largest private forestry owner. In December 2014, its investment fund bought 13 forestry plots, and two in Wales, for £49m, doubling its forestry holdings to 13,215 ha. A commercial plantation’s uniform blocks of spruce and conifers are disliked by conservationists but loved by investors because they attract grants and offer reliable profits.

Late last year, a Danish clothing billionaire, Anders Povlsen, and his wife Anne, became Scotland’s largest private landowners after buying a small 1,100 acre estate near Aviemore. They already had six estates in Sutherland, in the far north of Scotland, and Glenfeshie, one of the most famous estates in the Cairngorms. They now own 89,000 ha (220,000 acres) across the Highlands, where they champion re-wilding, heavily restricting deer and sheep grazing. Povlsen, reputedly worth £4.5bn, also spends heavily on community facilities.
The Duke of Buccleuch, who was Scotland’s largest landowner until overtaken by the Povlsens last year, has been downsizing in the south-west of Scotland. He put 3,626 ha (8,959 acres) of farmland near Langholm on sale last year, reportedly valued at more than £19m.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/mar/20/report-calls-for-reform-of-unhealthy-land-ownership-in-scotland

Socialism through the ballot box?



Many detractors of the socialist case criticise Marx and Engels and their early followers as being advocates of violent revolution and are wont to cite statements they made in support of this claim. And it is not uncommon for these same critics to claim that socialist/communists (the words means the same) of today still hold out for violent insurrection as a means to an end. Whilst it may be true that the first communist revolutionaries did advocate violent overthrow of the then existing order, it has to be remembered that it was at a time when they were barred from the ballot box, when they saw violence as the only tool of change, before the Reform Acts of 1867 and 1884 and which enfranchised many workers.*

With the 1867 Act Marx and his associates began to see a chink in the armour of the master class. The franchise was being widened and they knew it would widen more and, as the capitalist class ruled via their executive in parliament, it was possible for revolution to be brought about peacefully and democratically and via the ballot box. 

Thus, Resolution IX of the London Conference of the International in September 1871, headed Political Action of the Working Class stated:

“Considering, that against this collective power of the propertied classes the working class cannot act, as a class, except by constituting itself into a political party, distinct from, and opposed to, all old parties formed by the propertied classes;

“That this constitution of the working class into a political party is indispensable in order to ensure the triumph of the social revolution and its ultimate end — the abolition of classes…”

In 1880, in the Introduction to the Programme of the French Workers’ Party, Marx wrote:

Considering,

That the emancipation of the productive class is that of all human beings without distinction of sex or race;

That the producers can be free only when they are in possession of the means of production;

That there are only two forms under which the means of production can belong to them

The individual form which has never existed in a general state and which is increasingly eliminated by industrial progress;

The collective form the material and intellectual elements of which are constituted by the very development of capitalist society;

Considering,

That this collective appropriation can arise only from the revolutionary action of the productive class – or proletariat - organized in a distinct political party;

That such an organization must be pursued by all the means the proletariat has at its disposal including universal suffrage which will thus be transformed from the instrument of deception that it has been until now into an instrument of emancipation.

In insisting that the working class had to constitute itself into a political party “, distinct from, and opposed to, all old parties formed by the propertied classes”, Marx not only infuriated the anarchists, alienated himself from those who hankered after the spilled blood of the master class, he was stating quite clearly that capitalism could only be defeated in the political arena and on the battlefield of ideas.

Whilst the capitalist class derive some power from their ownership and control of the means for producing and distributing wealth, their real power lies in their control over the machinery of state. This power is derived by the mandate the voters give them at election time, voters who can seen no fault in the existing system and will readily support whichever bunch of brigands can hoodwink them the best, via promises and pledges at election time, convincing the workers that they can best run the capitalist system. 

Our detractors faced now with the argument that it is possible for the workers to create a mass party capable of challenging the master class in the arena in which they have hitherto been so successful, and taking over the machinery of state, counter that faced with an impending defeat at the polls, they (the masters) would suspend the democratic process and establish a dictatorship. The democratic process, which the workers are ready to use to oust the master class, can now be declared obsolete by bunch of gangsters in high office!

The problem here is that our detractors fail to realise that a mass party, about to take power, would assume that a worldwide socialist consciousness already existed and, moreover, that there had been a change in the general mindset of parliament, with socialist delegates already having been elected. It would assume that the big clashes had already been won by the workers on the battlefield of ideas. The character of government across the world would already have changed as a result of these victories, so there would be no chance of a suspension of democratic procedures, the establishment of a dictatorship or a coup on behalf of those wishing to maintain the profit system.

The majority of governments around the world today rule by the consent of the governed as previously mentioned. And they rule, in truth, because the majority of workers have that false consciousness that prevents them seeing what is in their real interests, not least because of the propaganda churned out daily by the state, the media (press, TV, radio etc), by the education system and via religious institutions. A growing socialist consciousness assumes that in all of these areas the workers have at last begun to reject the lies, the false promises, the state’s version of history, the belief in supernatural beings, the concept of leadership. A growing class consciousness suggests here is a majority that will no longer be bribed with reforms, although it can be imagined that many news ones will have been introduced to win the workers back over to the capitalist cause.

If by some act of desperation and stupidity there was an attempt to suspend democratic procedures and install a dictatorship by force of arms, one would imagine that this class conscious majority would not tolerate it one second. The workers would have no option but to resort to violent methods to defend their interests. But having said this, even this act of desperation on behalf of the master class would be counterproductive, revealing to the last doubters of the socialist case, the true nature of the beast that has exploited their class for so long, revealing that they hold the wishes of the workers in utter contempt and are more than prepared to suspend workers’ hard fought rights and maintain power at gun point.

Socialists, though doubtful such a scenario would be enacted by the capitalist class, would be the first to defend the hard won gains of the workers against any violent backlash by the defenders of capitalism, though quickly restoring the democratic apparatus as soon as the threat had vanished. Make no mistake, socialists, whilst defenders of the parliamentary road to socialism and hateful of violence for political ends, are not died in the wool pacifists. If the master class wanted to fight it out bloodily, we are more than ready to accommodate them.

All said, genuine socialists insist the revolution will be bloodless and brought about by a class conscious majority, aware of exactly what socialism means, and via the ballot box.

* The 1884 Act and the 1885 Redistribution Act tripled the electorate, giving the vote to most agricultural labourers. By this time, voting was becoming a right rather than the property of the privileged. However, women were not granted voting rights until the Act of 1918, which enfranchised all men over 21 and women over thirty. This last bit of discrimination was eliminated 10 years later (in 1928) by the Equal Franchise Act

John Bisset



Tuesday, March 19, 2019

The case for Socialism


The world we live in is one that is fraught with contradiction. Millions of our fellow humans are chronically malnourished and many more millions will, on any one day, go without food. Millions are homeless, many living in slums or on the streets, yet there is no shortage of vacant buildings and certainly no shortage of building materials or skilled builders and craftsmen presently out of work. Again, we find that the market not only dictates who does and does not eat, but who does and does not sleep comfortably. Well over a billion have no access to clean water, while its growing scarcity is calculated to spark many wars across the globe this coming century. Meanwhile, the technology exists to set up treatment plants capable of cleaning the dirtiest water. While millions of children die each year of curable diseases and while we still await breakthroughs in medical science that can cure the presently incurable, we find there are literally thousands of scientists around the world employed in weapons research projects – paid by their respective governments to devise new methods of murder such as by robot drones. The list is as endless as it is insane. At every turn we find evidence of how capitalism destroys us physically and mentally, retarding real human development. At every turn we come smack up against the iron law of our age – “can’t pay, can’t have”. At every turn we find capitalism running wild like a rabid dog, infecting all it comes into contact with.

Credit where credit is due. Capitalism has enabled us to carry out some pretty fantastic technological and scientific feats. Advances in warfare sparked a race for rocket technology that has enabled us explore the furthest limits of the solar system. The search for oil and other resources has allowed us to plumb the deepest oceans and map out the ocean beds. We can split the atom, map the human genome, and perform the most amazing organ transplants. Nothing, it seems, is beyond us. Our productive powers are unprecedented. Our capabilities are awe-inspiring. Sadly, however, and in spite of the technology at our disposal, the never-ending battle for profits means that we have entered the 21st century dragging with us every social ill that plagued the previous century. War, hunger, poverty, disease, and homelessness are still making the headlines, and each of these problems is, to a lesser or greater degree, rooted in the way we continue to organise ourselves for production. The terrible irony is that we are already capable of solving the major problems that face us. Indeed, we have been capable of solving them for quite some time – though obviously never within the context of capitalism. 

Years ago, the World Health Organisation revealed that the technology existed to feed a world population twelve times its (then) size. Years ago, the UN reported that Africa could easily feed a population six times its current size if western farming technology was introduced. Science and technology are in fact so advanced as to enable us to solve all these problems. However, the requirements of profit everywhere act as a stumbling block not only to the full use of the productive forces, but also to the full and unhindered use of science and technology in the service of humanity. 

Socialists long ago realised that the problems we face are in fact social problems, not natural ones or the vengeance of gods – social problems because they have their roots in the way our world is organised for production, that is production for profit, not need. If you think seriously about it, you’ll be hard pressed to find any aspect of our lives that is not subordinated to the requirements of profit. This is the case the world over. We are all of us at the mercy of the anarchic laws of capitalism.

What is to be done?

If this is the case, then what can we do about it? Socialists believe the only way forward lies in abolishing the money/wages/profit system that we know as capitalism and establishing a world socialist society or, in other words, a world of free access to the benefits of civilisation. Only then can we gain real control over our world and reassert control over our own destiny. Only then can we produce without polluting our world and only then can we enjoy a world in which there is no waste or want or war.

Socialists advocate a world without borders or frontiers, social classes or leaders, states or governments or armies. A world devoid of money or wages, exchange, buying or selling. A world where production is freed from the artificial constraints of profit. A world in which people give freely of their abilities and take according to their own self-defined needs from the stockpile of communal wealth. A global system in which each person has a free and democratic say in how their world is run.

Human nature a barrier?

Of course, many will agree that such a world would be a beautiful place to live in, but that “human nature” will always be a barrier to its establishment, because humans are “by nature” greedy, selfish and aggressive. It quickly becomes apparent that what they are describing is not human nature as such, but various traits of human behaviour exhibited under particular circumstances. Socialists maintain that human behaviour is shaped by the kind of system people are brought up to live in – that it is not our consciousness that determines our social existence but our social existence which determines our consciousness. Nobody is born a racist or a patriot, a bigot or with a belief in gods. Nobody is born a murderer, a robber or a rapist, and our alleged greed for money is no more a function of the natural human thought process than were slavery or witch burning.

In general, the ideas the common people hold have been acquired second-hand, passed down from the ruling class above us. This is because the class which owns and controls the productive process also controls the intellectual life process in general. Any anti-social behaviour is likewise influenced by our social circumstances at any given time, i.e., when we are poor, depressed, lonely, angry and frustrated.

In most cases, those who produce the world’s wealth (some 95 percent of the world’s population) have had that second-rate education that makes free-thought difficult – an upbringing that conditions us to accept without question the ideas of our betters and superiors. Indeed, the education system is geared to perpetuate the rule of an elite, insofar as it never encourages children to question and take issue with the status quo. Children may well cite that 8 times 8 equals 64, but how many will ask about the cause of wars or query the destruction of food?

Socialists hold that because we can adapt our behaviour, the desire to cooperate should not be viewed as irrational. We hold that humans are, “by nature”, cooperative and that we work best when faced with the worst and that our humanity shines through when the odds are stacked against us. There are millions of cases of people donating their blood and organs to complete strangers, sacrificing their lives for others, of people giving countless hours of their free time to charitable work – all of this without financial incentive. There is even the case of a man throwing himself on top of a grenade to protect children in a school yard. He died to protect children, none of which were his own, and in the instant knowledge that his action was suicidal.

Today, world capitalism threatens the human race with extinction. The reason this obnoxious system survives is because we have been conditioned to accept it, not born to perpetuate it. Rest assured, no gene inclines us to defend the profit system.

Been tried?

Many believe that socialism has already been tried and has failed. They then point to the former Soviet Union, to China, Cuba and a dozen other states that claimed to have established “socialism”. What they fail to grasp is that socialism has existed nowhere, and that what existed – being passed off as socialism – was in fact state capitalism, not socialism or communism (which mean the same thing). A cursory glance at the affairs of these countries reveals they never abolished the wages system. The rulers exploited their workers and outlawed dissent. They produced when only viable to do so, maintained commodity production, traded according to the dictates of international capital and, like every other capitalist state, were prepared to go to war to defend their economic interests. Moreover, in all of these countries, it was believed that socialism could be established by force, that socialism could exist in one country. The Leninists who carried out the Bolshevik Revolution maintained that the revolution could only be carried out by a minority vanguard party, that the masses were too ignorant to understand the case for change.

Socialism, like capitalism, can only exist on a global scale, and that it will only come about when a majority of the world’s people want it and are prepared to organise for it peacefully and democratically, in their own interests and without leaders. No vanguard can establish socialism – “the emancipation of the working class must be the work of the working class itself”.

We can do it

But who are the “working class”? Agreeing with Marx, we believe that there are two classes in society – the working class and the capitalist class, each one determined by its relationship to the means of living. The capitalist class own and control the means and instruments for producing and distributing wealth, living as parasites off profits, rent and interest. The working class, other than possessions we have purchased with our own sweat, own little more than our ability to sell our physical and mental abilities to the highest bidder. There is no “middle class” as the working class includes land workers, doctors, lawyers and teachers – anyone, indeed, who must sell their mental and physical energies to survive.

This class, the working class, runs the world and it is important to grasp this fact. It is we who fish the oceans and tend the forests and till the land and plantations. It is we who build the cities and railroads, the bridges and roads, the docks and airports. It is we who staff the hospitals and schools, who empty the bins and go down the sewers. It is we, the working class, who produce everything society needs from a pin to an oil-rig, who provide all of its services. If we can do all of this off our own bats, then surely, we can continue to do so without a profit-greedy minority watching over us and, more, in our own interests.

The ruling class, of capitalists and their executive, the governments of the world, have no monopoly on our skills and abilities. These belong to us. Moreover, it is we who are responsible for the inventions that have benefited humanity and the improvements in productive techniques. Most inventions and improvements are the result of those who do the actual work thinking up easier and faster ways of completing a task, the result of ideas being passed down from generation to generation, each one improving the techniques of the previous. If those who work have given the world so much, in the past say 2000 years, then how much more are we capable of providing in a world devoid of the artificial constraints of profit?

Capitalism must go

It is easy to cite the advantages of capitalism over previous economic systems. Many people believe that capitalism, though not perfect, is the only system possible. One thing is certain, though – if we follow the capitalist trajectory, we’re in for some pretty troublesome times. Capitalism has undoubtedly raised the productive potential of humanity. It is now quite possible to provide a comfortable standard of living for every human on the planet. But, to reiterate, capitalism now stands as a barrier to the full and improved use of the world’s productive and distributive forces. In a world of potential abundance, the unceasing quest for profit imposes on our global society widespread artificial scarcity. Hundreds of millions of humans are consigned to a life of abject poverty, whilst the majority live lives filled with uncertainty.

Our ability to imagine has brought us so very far, from the days when our ancestors chipped away at flint to produce the first tools, to the landing of someone on the moon, the setting up of the world wide web, and the mapping out of the human genome. Is it really such a huge leap of the imagination to now envisage a social system that can take over from the present capitalist order of things? Is it just too daring to imagine humans consigning poverty, disease, hunger and war to some pre-historic age?

Do we really need leaders deciding our lives for us? Do we really need governments administering our lives when what is really needed is the administration of the things we need to live in peace and security? Must every decision made by our elites be first of all weighed on the scales of profit, tilted always in their favour? A growing number think not and have mobilised to confront what they perceive to be the major problems of contemporary capitalism.

In recent years there has been a world-wide backlash against neoliberal globalisation, corporate power and the iniquities of modern-day capitalism. Everywhere where the world’s ruling elite have assembled to decide their next step they have been met with protests and demonstrations that have attracted hundreds of thousands. Demonstrations at Seattle, Gothenburg, Prague, Genoa and Gleneagles, for instance, have fuelled the ongoing debate on the nature of modern-day capitalism. Thousands of articles have been written on the subject and hundreds of books have been published that explore the alternatives offered by the anti-globalisation movement.

What is now clear is that the anti-globalisation movement, however well-meaning, does not seek to replace capitalism with any real alternative social system. At best it attracts a myriad of groups, all pursuing their own agenda. Some call for greater corporate responsibility. Some demand the reform of international institutions. Others call for the expansion of democracy and fairer trading conditions. All, however, fail to address the root cause of the problems of capitalism.

One thing is certain: capitalism cannot be reformed in the interests of the world’s suffering billions, because reform does not address the basic contradiction between profit and need. The world’s leaders cannot be depended upon because they can only ever act as the executive of corporate capitalism. The expansion of democracy, while welcome, serves little function if all candidates at election time can only offer variations on the same basic set of policies that keep capitalism in the ascendancy.

Capitalism must be abolished if we as a species are to thrive, if the planet is to survive. No amount of reform, however great, will work. Change must be global and irreversible. It must involve all of us. We need to erase borders and frontiers; to abolish states and governments and false concepts of nationalism. We need to abolish our money systems, and with it buying, selling and exchange. And in place of this we need to establish a different global social system – a society in which there is common ownership and true democratic control of the Earth’s natural and industrial resources. A society where the everyday things we need to live in comfort are produced and distributed freely and for no other reason than that they are needed – Socialism.

It is now no utopian fantasy to suggest we can live in a world without waste or want or war, in which each person has free access to the benefits of civilisation. That much is assured. We certainly have the science, the technology and the know-how. All that is missing is the will – the global desire for change that can make that next great historical advance possible; a belief in ourselves as masters of our own destiny; a belief that it is possible to free production from the artificial constraints of profit and to fashion a world in our own interests. And how soon this happens depends upon us all – each and every one of us.

John Bisset

Monday, March 18, 2019

Monitoring Wage Growth?


First the good news – Stats-Canada said 66,800 new jobs were created in January, but don’t uncork the champagne yet folks: the jobless rate went up from 5.6 per cent to 5.8 because more people were looking for work.

 So the more things change, the more they stay the same. 

The youth jobless rate went up from 11.1 per cent to 11.2 — what a great future they have to look forward too. 

The year-over-year hourly wage growth for ”permanent employees”, was 1.8 per cent, which was up from December’s 1.5, but below its May peak of 3.9. 

However, we must be of good cheer; the geniuses that try to run the Bank of Canada said they are monitoring wage growth ahead of its interest rate decisions as they try to determine how well indebted households can absorb higher borrowing costs.

 Imagine them trying to run a children’s party.

For socialism, 
Steve, Mehmet, John &contributing members of the SPC .

Reforms Devalued.


On Feb 8, NDP leader Andrea Horwath lashed out at Doug Ford and his
government for screwing around with various beneficial reforms. 
To quote,
"Ontarians have watched Doug Ford and his government continue their assault on the things we value most. In the past few weeks alone, Doug Ford has taken specific aim at education, including full day kindergarten, clean water, the Greenbelt, help for college and university students, autism services and funding for children and our public health system. None of this is what people voted for."

When asked what we can expect from the NDP, Ms.Horwath said,". . .more bills, ideas and proposals to tackle the things that matter.” 

This just goes to prove that if a government can abolish or water down good reform measures then its pointless working for reforms.

For socialism, 
Steve, Mehmet, John & contributing members of the SPC 

There Is Always Money for War Purposes.

Two unrelated events recently underlined capitalism’s crappy priorities.

 A fellow school bus driver said to me – "Commercial drivers get paid twice as much as us and they justify it by saying they are transporting valuable merchandise, but we drive kids, aren’t they also valuable?” 

You might think $60 billion dollars would help reduce poverty for some, but that is the amount the Canadian government are going to pay the US war company Lockheed Martin to design a fleet of warships. 

Great system isn’t it?

For socialism, 
Steve, Mehmet, John & contributing members of the SPC .

Glasgow Branch Meeting

Wednesday, March 20, at
Maryhill Community Central Halls,
304 Maryhill Road,
Glasgow G20 7YE

Socialism is not production for profit. It is production for use. It is not production for private ownership and nor is it the state ownership of resources. It is the common ownership of the wealth. It is not inequality and misery and persecution and discrimination; it is egalitarian and fair. It is not poverty and want; it is freedom from want. It is freedom from war. It is freedom from squalor. It is the opposite of what exists today and it expresses what people need and dearly want and would love to see. 

Solidarity means fellowship, fraternity, mutual sympathy, interest in each other’s welfare regardless of nationality, race, gender, or sexual orientation. Socialism is People Power.

Fact of the Day

In the list of the top 25 local authority areas for people paid more than £150,000 Edinburgh comes 16th with 4,000 residents.

END TO THE POLICY OF CRUMBS


The Socialist Party aims at eliminating the class struggle by destroying the classes themselves and making the economic struggle of individuals impossible and unnecessary by abolishing commodity production. Socialists in all countries acknowledge the international character of the present-day working-class movement and proclaim the principle of international solidarity of producers.

We, the exploited, are the overwhelming majority. And yet the exploiters have the power and dominate us! Wherein lies their power?

It is rooted in their ownership of the greater part of the land, the mines, the factories, transport– in one word, in their ownership of the means of life.

It is maintained through their control of and command over the State, the armed forces, the police, the Courts, and the whole coercive machinery, with which they keep us on our knees.

It is rooted in their ability due to their command of the media to stupefy us.

We were given the right to vote, but the right to the sources of wealth, the right to the mines, to the factories, to their great estates, they keep for themselves. Ours is the voting power; theirs the wealth, the profits; such is democracy that we keep voting for the parties of the exploiters. Most of the law made in Parliament is destined to serve the interests of the exploiters. To us they throw the occasional bone, some crumbs, in order to hide their policy of roguery. The Labour Party demand from our masters are bigger crumbs. The Left preach socialism in fine phrase, but the mines, the factories, the large estates – they leave to the bloodsuckers. Open your eyes, ye poor and downtrodden. The Socialist Party want to show you, on every question or measure which comes before Parliament for consideration, that the Conservatives and the Labourites care for nothing except the moneybags of the exploiters. We want to show you that they deceive you at every turn. Only by sending men and women into this Parliament who will have no other aim but the ABOLITION OF THE WHOLE SYSTEM OF PRIVATE PROPERTY IN THE MEANS OF LIFE, will your interests be served, and will you be able to organise production on a new basis, in the interest of all. If you want to free yourselves from the oppression of capitalism, then you must break the power of the exploiters by common revolutionary action. Victorious revolutionary action presupposes a CLASS-CONSCIOUS working class. You will therefore have to remove the blinkers from your eyes.  It is for the purpose of making you see, in order to expose the daily practices in the political arena – the lies, the deceit, the humbug, and the misleading ways and intricacies of this sham democracy that we want to get into Parliament. Written right across every page of human history is the declaration that no people can be free so long as the private ownership of the means of production and distribution endures.

THE MEANS OF WEALTH PRODUCTION AND DISTRIBUTION TO THE ORGANISED COMMUNITY. The decisions which effect the whole of society, such as what to produce, how much to produce, when and where to produce it, and how to use and distribute it are the decisions which affect the total resources of the economy, and the lifestyle and opportunities of everyone within society. Control over these resources and decisions, that is workers’ management of the economy, is the socialist alternative to capitalism.

The Socialist Party is necessarily a revolutionary party and its basic demand is the common ownership of the means of production and distribution and the operation of all industry in the interest of all the people. This will mean an economic democracy. Economic freedom can result only from common ownership, and upon this vital principle the Socialist Party differs diametrically from every other party. Between private ownership and common ownership there can be no compromise. One produces for profit, the other for use. One produces billionaires and beggars, palaces and hovels, the other abolishes class rule, wipes out class distinction, secures peace, and makes of this earth for the first time a harmonious habitable planet.

Sunday, March 17, 2019

Organise for socialism with the Socialist Party


We are by now familiar with the type of extreme weather events caused by climate change. Few can deny that the world today is in a state of upheaval and chaos, reflected in the widespread turmoil and conflict. The fact that such conditions prevail throughout the world, and have prevailed for a long time, logically suggests the presence of a common cause. The Socialist Party has repeatedly demonstrated it is the capitalist system that does not and cannot work in the interests of the majority.

Businesses cannot afford to be overly concerned with stopping global warming. The existence of every corporation is based on its ability to make more profits than the next corporation. Business is not about to cut its profits for anybody. Business has not cut its profits to provide full employment or to avoid wars. There’s no reason to expect them to do such a thing in order to slow down climate change. As long as capitalist interests and their politicians can lay the blame on individual’s lifestyles and buying habits and persuade people that industry is operating as concerned citizens, the basic problem of climate change will never be solved. We have to recognize that there are forces in the society which are content to maintain its even though it drives society towards oblivion. We live in a world where global warming is the direct result of the crazy, profit-motivated system we live in. And so long as that system is allowed to continue, temperatures will continue to increase. The drive for profit leads to the neglect of everything that stands in the way of this has created ecological havoc from one end of the planet to the other.

Capitalism is a social system in which most people have to go to work for wages in order to live. This means that they are forced to sell their mental and physical energies to an employer. The interests of the seller of any article are in getting the highest possible price for what he is selling. Thus, the workers are forced to struggle for the best conditions for the sale of their labour power. This means that they must struggle for shorter hours, less intense working pace, higher wages and so on.

 It is obvious that the workers will be able to assert their interests more strongly if they do so together: this is the basic reason for the existence of trade unions. They are the only weapon which workers can use under capitalism to defend and to improve their working conditions. Because of this, all workers should join their trade union. Any trade union action which is in line with working class interests is worthy of wholehearted support from all workers —and receives the support of the Socialist Party.

It is true, however, that trade unions do many things which are quite opposed to working class interests; some of them, as our correspondent points out, tend to help capitalism run more smoothly. Such actions are contrary to trade unionism and the Socialist Party opposes them. Thus, we opposed trade union participation in the war effort and support of government productivity drives.

While we hold that, on balance, compulsory trade union membership is not in the best interests of the Trade Union movement and the working class, we also recognise that trade union action, and strikes in particular, cannot operate without trying to compel would be blacklegs to conform to the decision of the majority. It is hardly surprising that trade unions have their faults. They are, after all, a feature of capitalist society and they must recruit workers of all sorts of political and religious opinions, who are united only in the struggle against their masters. When socialism is established, trade unions will exist no more—the need for them will have disappeared. Until that day, life under capitalism is a battle, and the workers must fight it with the best weapon available.

A planned socialist society which has control of the means of production, distribution will ensure adequate precautions to ensure sustainability. For instance, carbon emissions into the atmosphere will be drastically reduced and less harmful alternatives sought. We will not be catapulted into situations in which whole populations are confronted by polluted air. Against this insane capitalist system, the Socialist Party raises its voice in emphatic protest and unqualified condemnation. It declares that if our society is to be rid of the host of economic, political and social ills that for so long have plagued it, the outmoded capitalist system of private ownership of the socially operated means of life and production for the profit of a few must be replaced by a new social order. That new social order must be organised on the sane basis of social ownership and democratic management of all the instruments of social production, all means of distribution and all of the social services. It must be one in which production is carried on to satisfy human needs and wants. In short, it must be genuine socialism. Despite the threat to workers' lives, despite the growing menace of environmental harm, a world of peace, liberty, security, health and abundance for all stands within our grasp. The potential to create such a society exists, but that potential can be realised only if workers act to gain control of their own lives by organising, politically and industrially, for socialism. Help us build a world in which everyone will share in and enjoy full benefits of the natural wealth of the planet. The Socialist Party calls upon all who realise the critical crises we face and who understand that a basic change in our society is needed to join us.

A local issue?


In 2005, the Socialist Party put up a candidate, Brian Gardner, to contest the Livingston by-election called after the death of Robin Cook. 

One of the hustings he attended was a question and answer public meeting hosted by the Save Fire Cover campaign of the Fire Brigade Union. When questioned Brian made no promises explaining, in the extremely unlikely scenario of him being elected, he could not fulfil any promises made. 

Instead, Brian pointed out in his answers that all these so-called “local” issues such as hospitals, schools and housing are pressing issues everywhere and importantly these are not really local issues, at all. It’s just that many people (and all of our opponents) think the solution is usually a local one, so there is no point looking elsewhere for the answer. Unhappy with the plans for the local hospital? Well, don’t worry whoever gets elected will have a word with the local Health Board and try and clarify the situation. Concerned about lack of fire cover because of closed fire stations? Don’t worry, one of the politicians will make sure you are consulted about it. 

In fact the problem underpinning most of the supposed “local” issues is usually much broader. It’s not just specific local problems (like poor consultation or ill thought through proposals). The whole issue of provision of essential services such as health care and schools is dictated by the level of resources allocated. And whether it is in Livingston or Llannelli, the same picture emerges: local services are extremely stretched and public sector workers are under pressure to work harder, for less money and now for longer with the retirement ages raised.

Our opponents are forever making all sorts of promises to the voters. They'll defend the NHS. They'll pay a “living wage”? In so doing we’d say they are fighting over the crumbs from the rich man’s plate, rather than upsetting the whole table. The Socialist Party’s view is that this is the merciless logic of the market system. The capitalist class don’t want to pay any more than they have to. Or anything more than the bare minimum. The reason? – ultimately, these costs come off the profits of UK Ltd.

Now in 2019, where are we? Did the elected politicians fix the problem of neighbourhood fire safety?
Livingston, a town of 50,000, has effectively only one fire appliance. A house fire in Livingston two weeks ago saw appliances from Bathgate and Edinburgh called to assist the Livingston appliance.

As Brian explained to the voters at the time. A vote for the Socialist Party is a statement that you don’t want to live this way and that you think another world is possible and you possess the confidence that humans can live and work co-operatively without the pressure of the wages system, or the rationing system of money.
https://www.scotsman.com/news/cuts-leave-scots-town-of-50-000-with-just-one-fire-engine-1-4890620



Fight with us for our futures


First of all it is a wrong conception to believe that socialism is going to be introduced by a socialist Government acting as an entity separate and apart from the people and managing their affairs for them. There will be no socialism until a majority understand socialism and organise to get it. They will decide what they want done and how they want it done. Once political power has been obtained, they, the majority, will decide how the proceeds of production are to be distributed among the members of society. Apart from the early period when there may be an insufficiency of certain kinds of goods (a heritage from capitalism) goods will be freely accessible to the members of society. There will be no private ownership of the means of life, hence no relationship of employers and employed and no buying and selling of labour-power. In other words, there will be no wages because there will be no system of wage-labour.

 Under capitalism the means of production and the products are the private property of the capitalist class. Money serves the purpose (among others) of enabling workers and capitalists to realise in a convenient form their respective shares of the products which the workers produce and the capitalists own; the workers’ share being their wages based on their cost of living. A money system is neither necessary nor possible under socialism. The means of production and the products will no longer be privately owned. The workers will not be in the position of selling their labour-power to a propertied class, and goods will not be the object of buying and selling transactions because buying and selling are only conceivable between private owners. Money will have lost its purpose and there will be no financial questions.

The workers are always having it drummed into them that they have a common interest with the capitalist class in maintaining capitalism. We are not concerned with the financial policy debates that arise under capitalism between the different sections of the capitalist class, although these questions greatly exercise the so-called “left-wing” organisations. They conceive it to be their duty or their interest to try to teach the capitalists how best to run capitalism, whereas we are concerned with pointing out to the workers how to get socialism.

The Socialist Party does not want to ‘nationalise the means of production. We, want to do nothing of the kind. Nationalisation or state capitalism is an arrangement by which the capitalists exploit the working class through the Government instead of through private companies. Under nationalisation the capitalists receive their property-incomes as before and remain the owners of the means of production. The difference consists in the holding of Government securities instead of company shares. It often means the replacement of a varying ratio of interest by a fixed rate. The change is in the interests of some of the capitalists. It is not in the interest of the working class. The Socialist Party has always opposed nationalisation. What socialism consists of is the removal of the capitalist class from their privileged positions as owners and controllers of the means of production and distribution. The change is a simple one. When a majority of the workers are socialist and are organised in the Socialist Party, they will gain control of the machinery of Government. By so doing they will have taken away from the capitalist class their only means of retaining their hold over the means of production, etc. Their political power taken from them, the capitalists will then just cease to be a propertied class.

The power of the capitalist to own and control his factories, land, workshops, &c., and only to permit these things to be used by the workers when and on such conditions as he thinks fit, is based on the laws of property and the armed forces which enforce those laws. That power is centred in Parliament and the rest of the political machinery, because it is Parliament which makes those laws and Parliament which maintains and controls the other political machinery and those armed forces. The Bank of England, like other private business concerns, exists and operates only by virtue of Acts of Parliament. It has no "power” and indeed no existence except that which Parliament permits. This fact is obscured by the circumstance that usually the capitalists in control of Parliament and the capitalists in control of the Bank of England either belong to the same group or see eye to eye because they have identical interests.

Very often a question posed to Socialist Party election candidates is “Why stand when you can’t win?” Our reply is that the goal of the campaign to inspire working people with an alternative vision of how society can run. We, in the Socialist Party, need to present a view of a democratic socialist society which can only be achieved through building a mass social movement. The reorganisation and transformation of our society, from a capitalist to a socialist society requires understanding, knowledge and the bonds of fraternity forged in the course of a struggle. The task that lies before us all is to build the confidence and the understanding, the political clarity which comes only through struggle that will enable the workers to take on and defeat not just an individual employer, but the entire employing class. It requires perseverance. Global warming and global warfare are not problems for politicians to solve while the rest of look on.  What’s emerging from all this is that humanity has to evolve for its own survival, and evolution is going to take all of us. We’re all in it together.

Today, the two looming “existential” threats are the possibility of nuclear war, and unprecedented climate change, yet neither of these seems to unduly concern our politicians. Brexit, a dispute between two capitalist class factions makes the daily headlines. Capitalism thrives on war, and we forget this historical fact at our peril. Nor do they seem worried about the drastic consequences of global warming, which has been denied, ignored, or downplayed in the media.

Workers creates the wealth and power that is then used against them. To be competitive, capitalists replace workers with machinery (computers and robotics) and cut wages. Weaker capitalists go bankrupt; their businesses are absorbed by the stronger, and ownership is concentrated into fewer hands. Workers’ organised ability to protect themselves from capital has waxed and waned. Today, it seems to be at a low point. Nevertheless, the capitalist class fears a mass international revolutionary working-class movement with the potential to end their rule and replace it by a productive system based not on the exploitation of the many for the profit of a few, but on human need: from each according to abilities to each according to needs. After a hundred plus years of campaigns to discredit, distort, defame, and demonise, the spectre of such a movement still haunts the ruling class.

Saturday, March 16, 2019

What road to socialism?




Many people make fun of the effort the Socialist Party puts into producing, distributing and selling the Socialist Standard and our collection of pamphlets. They seek to compare our efforts with the sleek performance and wide influence of the big Dailies. The Socialist Standard, however, attempts to provide its readers with an understanding of events from a class perspective. By contrast, the aim of the mainstream press is to stop the development of such a coherent interpretation of the world, offering stories about things that in reality have no relevance to a worker’s life at all and presenting a skewed editorial line representing the interests of the owners and his fellow capitalists. The need to win workers to a socialist perspective is greater than ever. The Socialist Standard remains vital to this.

All reformist parties – no matter how grandiose their verbal allegiance to “socialism” and supposed socialist ideals – conceive of their political aims as lying within the framework of the capitalist state: as winning reforms from capitalism, winning a majority in the capitalist government, or even as “transforming” the capitalist government into a “socialist government” (i.e., requesting the capitalist state to commit suicide). A reformist party will not overthrow capitalism, since it functions within the framework of capitalism; and consequently, it cannot halt poverty or stop war, both of which follow necessarily from the continuance of capitalism.

The Socialist Party declares that its aim is to develop the class consciousness of the workers through our education and agitation. The struggle for socialism is the struggle against the capitalist class who live off the labour of others, and it is the struggle against all exploitation. The capitalist system rests on the exploitation of workers. It can only end in the working-class transferal of all land, natural resources and factories to the whole of society for the organisation of social production under which all that is produced by the workers and all improvements of production benefit the people themselves. The emancipation of the working class is the act of self-emancipation. All around us there are the signs of a world in crisis, yet men and women seem unable to do anything about it. Resources that should be used to comfort the sick, help the poor and feed the hungry are squandered. The greatest threat comes from global warming although the risk of global nuclear war always remains present. And the situation grows even grimmer. No wonder many are in despair. Even some socialists talk of society collapse, catastrophe and apocalypse and warn that in the choice between “socialism or barbarism”, the latter is becoming ever more likely. But all is not lost…yet. The Socialist Party retains trust in the ability of the working class to change society and understand that it means rejecting the whole profit system and the politics of class collaboration, even if they are not yet ready to take this step. The present downturn in the class struggle will not last forever. However, the Socialist Party is realistic about the present situation and has not given way to fake optimism. At the same time as recognising just how bad things are, the Socialist Party has resisted succumbing despair. The working class is far from finished, and our job is to keep preparing for the struggle for socialism. With socialism, we can go on to use the world’s resources in a sustainable manner where humanity’s accumulated knowledge and skill are used to create a world in which poverty, exploitation, and warfare are only bad memories. The Socialist Party has no illusions about the scale of the task, or about the limitations imposed by our size, influence, and talents. We know that only the working class can transform society. We don’t seek to place ourselves at the head of our class. We seek only to make workers conscious of their interests and their power.

The Socialist Party possesses a vision of the kind of society we want for ourselves and our children and their children. We recognise the inability of reformism to solve the problems that capitalism creates and understand that politics is all about winning the battle for socialist ideas with a vision of the ability of workers to transform the world.