|
WAGE SLAVERY |
The
Socialist Party contends that it is capitalism and capitalism alone
which creates or exacerbates all of the major problems in the world
today. Poverty, unemployment, homelessness, war, and, to a large
extent, disease, but, foremost, let's not forget the current crisis of climate change
and the accompanying destruction of natural resources. These are all
fundamental to capitalism and cannot be solved on any long-term basis
while this system continues.
Those
who support the continuation of present-day society would disagree
with the Socialist Party analysis and claim that capitalism can be
changed to, if not solve most social problems by means of
legislation, at least alleviate their worst effects.
A
reform is not a fundamental change; it is an attempt to alter the way
in which capitalism is run. The fundamentals of capitalism are
minority ownership of the means of production, the production of
wealth for sale on the market, a money economy, a wages system, and
the realisation of profit from the difference between the wages the
producers are paid and the sale of what they have produced. The forms
of government and the methods employed to actually run the system are
not fundamental. The fundamentals of capitalism must remain the same.
There must always be a drive for profit and a drive to expand markets
which come before any other consideration. Capitalism cannot escape
the iron laws of its own economics. Even given the desire to do so
from those in power they must follow the laws of the market—or go
under, to be succeeded by those capitalists who have a more realistic
appreciation of the necessities. The system hangs together as a
whole; no one part of it can be taken away.
For
reforms to "succeed”, capitalism would need to work smoothly
and rationally. But capitalism is a totally chaotic and
uncoordinated system which cannot function in such a way because it
only follows one law—the drive for profit. This blows apart the best-laid
schemes of government or reformers,
especially in regards to the regulatory measures proposed to mitigate
global warming.
It
is quite impossible to achieve a long-term plan for any carbon-zero
objective because capitalism is always in some crisis and demands
immediate responses to pressures. World events occur with such
rapidity that for any country just to try to maintain stability is
about as much as they can do. They are so busy swimming against the
tide of change that they are using all their strength just to keep
their heads above water. They are so busy reacting there is no time
to act. So, even if a long-term plan could ever work—and there is
no evidence to show that it would and overwhelming evidence to
show—that it could not—capitalism is such a dynamic system that
it will not stand still long enough to allow such a plan to happen.
All
countries face desperate dilemmas in their relationships with other
countries. Many strategies have been placed into operation to reduce
carbon emission and all have failed. Even if it were possible to
iron out the conflicts of interest, the co-operation of all the major
countries would have to be secured. This is impossible because every
capitalist country is always following a policy to suit its own
interests. Since a major objective is to export more than is imported
at any given time, it is obvious that not all can succeed. Add to
this the commercial interests of the multinational corporations and
the difficulties encountered in handling lesser developed capitalist
countries and it can be seen why reforms of international capitalist
relations cannot succeed in harmonising capitalism with nature on a
world basis.
Why
do the environmental activists advocate reforms and put them forward
when the evidence is that these well-meaning schemes will not work?
It
is a mistake to accept that the capitalists understand their own
system. They have never studied it in the way that socialists have.
Capitalist economists make their reputations, and get their bread and
butter, from supplying "solutions" to capitalist problems.
What kind of future would he or she have by pointing out that there
is really no way of ensuring a stable economy and that the system
always staggers on from crisis to crisis?
Capitalists
are struggling to survive in business and maintain their competitive
edge. To do this they must make sufficient profit to re-invest in
capital equipment and keep it up-to-date. This has to be their
priority. Anything else comes afterwards. It is not the “wicked”
capitalist who brings this about; it is not a moral decision, it is
an economic necessity.
Reforms
are basically of two kinds; those that are meant to make the
capitalist system run a little more smoothly for the capitalist class
and those that are meant to bring about improvements in the
conditions of people and the planet. Neither kind can work because
only a fundamental change of social system can make any difference.
Reforms are not meant to change the fundamental set-up of capitalism;
they are expressly the opposite of that. The most that can be
achieved is to ease the conditions of a section of the working class
for a time. But as fast as a reform is applied fresh problems are
thrown up on account of the changing pressures of capitalism. So our
question to those engaged in the environmental movement, remains, is
it worth the effort? Why chase after elusive reforms when it is a
futile effort and a waste of energy. What is really required is
that effort should be put into something that is lasting — working
for socialism.
The Socialist Party cautions those who want
little more than bandage over capitalism's worse weeping sores that
reforming the system will not halt climate change