Capitalist wealth or a Commonwealth?

Most workers find it hard to imagine how mankind could possibly live without money. Some argue that we must have money because we have always had money. Men have therefore become obsessed with money, which has attained the position of a god, since it is money which, in the capitalist system, becomes the real life power. Without it men and women must starve. But what of money in the next stage of human evolution — Socialism? Why should it not still be required? When men produce for their own needs, and not for the benefit of a handful of exploiters as they have done since primitive times, when national boundaries disappear and the world’s wealth is owned in common, when competition gives way to cooperation, then exchange relationships disappear. And so, as money can only exist in a private society, it must vanish with private property.

Capitalism may sometimes be depicted as civilised, but it is by nature predatory and cannot be tamed. Capitalism has long functioned without a conscience. The basis of capitalism is the ceaseless struggle between the "haves" and the “have-nots". Socialism embodies a future more humane and liberating than what many imagine possible.

Rather than changing the configuration of the pieces creating the climate problem, change the world instead. The problem is capitalism, not corporations per se. And the problem with capitalism is political, not technological. Geo-engineering solutions to climate change address the problem in isolation and provide no indication that the unsolvable problem of unintended consequences is understood.

The Socialist Party is often accused, when we argue with the Left and reformers, of splitting the workers. They claim it would better serve the interests of socialism if we stopped being puritans and joined them in the day-to-day campaigns. Our answer to these assertions is, and always has been, that we will join with any organisation provided it devotes its activities entirely to socialism. For us socialism can have only one meaning; i.e., a system of living under which the means of production-land, factories and machinery, etc., are in the COMMON holding of the WHOLE community. The wages system will cease to exist, there will be no classes, and instead of buying and selling for the profit of the few, goods and services will be freely available for USE by all. We further hold that this can only arise as the result of the conscious political triumph of the world working-class in their struggle against their only real enemy, the world capitalist class.

While the left wingers clamour for a change of government, we concern ourselves with what really matters, not a change of office boys, but a change of system.We maintain that the wages system the world over is proof of workers being exploited, either for the benefit of private shareholders or government bondholders. It is a fundamental difference between ourselves and all other parties that they embrace LEADERSHIP while we reject it. Workers only need leaders while they do not, know either the objective or the method; no “spearhead” or “thinking minority” can ever lead the working-class to Socialism, because leadership implies the ignorance of the followers. Like Marx and Engels, we have always maintained that the movement for Socialism is the “conscious movement of the immense majority in the interest of the immense majority.” (Communist Manifesto).

We find our work of propagating Socialism made very much harder by the confusion spread amongst workers by these “left wingers.”

"Freedom” has been the battle cry in countless revolutions and revolts throughout the ages, and recent events across the World but presently in the situation of the Kurdish against Turkey must have recalled past sacrifices immortalised by poets, such as Byron's “Yet, Freedom! yet thy banner, torn but flying, streams like the thunderstorm against the wind.” At the present time the conscience of the world is being stirred by the heroic but unequal struggle of the Kurds against the might of the Turks. The iron fist closes and the rebels drown in their own blood as another paragraph is completed in the history of Middle East —another event in a chapter of foreign invasions. Western media have mostly made statements sympathetic to the rebels. The tragic bravery of the Kurdish should not blind the workers to the fact that it is not in their interest to support the struggle of either.

We believe that you share our concern for the well-being of people in our society, and for the welfare of the planet itself. As members of a long-established independent democratic movement which seeks by persuasion and world-wide peaceful political organisation to transform our present society into one fit for humankind. we say the problems of our world cannot be solved within the existing structures of production and government. Our world is divided into national areas dominated by class minorities in each country, which, either by private or corporate ownership or by state bureaucratic parties monopolise the means of production. These ruling classes and their political representatives, by reason of a combination of historical circumstances, governmental, military and ideological control or influence, are able to keep the majority of the world's population in subjection. In the decisive areas of the world this domination takes the form of people being denied access to the means of living except on the basis of working for a wage or salary. In the major countries of the world, the people who, in the widest sense, produce what we need to live, are wage-slaves. 

Our access to food, clothing, shelter and other needs is rationed by money. It is a world-system based upon the class monopoly of the means of production where things are produced and services rendered as commodities for sale at a profit. Labour-power also is a commodity: its price is what we receive as a wage or salary. Each enterprise or grouping of capitalism, in competition with others in the market, must strive to increase the profit surplus which it makes after the investment of capital. If it fails to achieve sufficient profit to re-invest in new machinery and techniques it will lose out to more powerful groupings or nations.

The class interests, values and drive for profit of the world-system have been the underlying reasons for the unprecedented destruction of life and resources throughout this century. This appalling process, made worse by new forms of pollution, including the spread of artificial radio-activity and the cutting-down of the rain forests, to say nothing of the possible effects of secret weapons, the existence of which it is reasonable to assume. This uncontrolled madness will continue unless we take the necessary democratic action to transform our way of life throughout the planet.

We believe that socialism can only be brought about by an overwhelming majority of the population, a majority which understands why capitalism must be replaced by socialism. If we are to bring into being production solely for use. where needs are self-determined, we must have a clear idea of how such a society could be established, organised and sustained. We must also ensure that the values and methods of the World Socialist Movement are fully consistent with its aims.

Socialism is a new world society where the means of production are commonly owned and where governments and systems of exchange, whether barter or money, have been replaced by democratic administration at local, regional and world levels: a society where there could be decentralised co-ordination of production with free access according to need.

Organise for a Better Life

WEAR WITH PRIDE

 

Gaelic Disappearing

The number of Gaelic speakers in Scotland’s island communities has plummeted in less than a decade, according to a leading Highland researcher who believes the language is on the point of “societal collapse” across Scotland.

Although just over 58,000 people reported themselves as Gaelic speakers in the 2011 Scottish census, Prof Conchúr Ó Giollagáin, the director of the Language Sciences Institute at the University of the Highlands and Islands, will publish a study next year following extensive fieldwork in the Western Isles, Skye and Tiree that estimates that the vernacular group on the islands, where speakers are most heavily concentrated, does not exceed 11,000.

Gaelic “will continue as the language of school and heritage but not as a living language”.

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2019/oct/18/gaelic-disappearing-from-scottish-island-communities

What is needed is socialism

Socialism from ‘above’ always appeals to those who seek a system of domination, hierarchy and exploitation. The “practical” person sneers at socialism as visionary, unattainable, and without any immediate social value, judging the world from the limited horizon which they afford, they fails to perceive that socialism is the only vital economic, political and moral force of modern times. Socialism is practical, in the best sense of the term; a living, vital force of inestimable value to society.

The Socialist Party stands for the self-emancipation of the working class. Thus we are open about our goals with our fellow workers. Socialist society will be state-free. With private property in industry and land abolished (but, of course, not in articles of personal use), with exploitation of the toilers ended, and with the capitalist class finally defeated and all classes liquidated, there will then be no further need for the State, which in its essence, is an organ of class repression. The guiding principle will be: “From each according to ability, to each according to needs.” That is, the distribution of life necessities—food, shelter, education, etc.—will be free, without let or hindrance. Socialist production, carried out upon the most efficient basis and freed from the drains of capitalist exploiters, will provide such an abundance of necessary commodities that there will be plenty for all with a minimum of effort. There will then be no need for penny-pinching measuring and weighing. Mutuaol aid and solidarity will be quite sufficient to prevent possible idlers from taking advantage of this free regime of distribution by either refusing to work or by anti-social waste. Socialism will bring the greatest advance in culture and general well-being of the masses in the history of the human race. Culture, emancipated from class ends, will pass to new and higher levels. Socialism is the guarantee of a new life for the needy and exploited of the earth.

Under capitalism, the capitalists own the means of production. Workers are forced to sell their labor power and the capitalist exploits and oppresses them. With socialism, the main means of production are owned by the community. Thus, the distribution of products and the social surplus created by the producders is in their hands. Socialism properly implies above all things the co-operative control by the workers of the machinery of production. Public ownership by the State is not socialism – it is only state capitalism. We repeat, state ownership and control is not necessarily Socialism – if it were, then the Army, the Navy, the Police, the Judges, the Gaolers, all would all be socialist functionaries, as they are State officials – but the ownership by the State of all the land and materials for labour, combined with the co-operative control by the workers of such land and materials, would be socialism. Schemes of state and municipal ownership are but schemes for the perfectioning of the mechanism of capitalist government-schemes to make the capitalist regime respectable and efficient for the purposes of the capitalist. They represent the class-conscious instinct of the business man who feels that capitalist should not prey upon capitalist, while all may unite to prey upon the workers.

Capitalism has failed to provide a full and happy life for all everywhere throughout the world. Politicians of all shades of political opinion have tried to control capitalism; they have used all kinds of political and economic devices to try and iron out its contradictions and make it function smoothly; they have founded new parties and concepts — they have even tried calling it “socialism” and “communism” — but the system defeats their efforts. We don’t have to call on economic theory to prove capitalism’s innate contradictions and inability to function in the interests of all. The evidence of our contention stands blatantly forth throughout the entire world of capitalism: nowhere has capitalism, despite the fantastic development of its wealth producing techniques, solved any of the basic social problems that afflict humanity and, often, when some slight amelioration of these problems is effected by some puny scheme of social reform new problems are created, often greater than those at which the reform was aimed. The fact is that capitalism is a social system based on the exploitation of the overwhelming majority, the majority in fact that produces all wealth, the working class. This is the nature of the system and no form of political management can make the system run contrary to its nature.

Throughout the world the competition among the working class for their needs in a system of organised scarcity becomes a weapon in the hands of politicians anxious to secure the support of the workers. Group features like religion, colour and ethnic origin are conveniently related to this competition by some politicians who accuse “them” of being responsible for “our” problems while other politicians disguise the real source of the problem by blaming it on the tensions, bigotries and prejudices induced by these bigots or racialists.

There is one group of organisations that does not make the claim that it has the ability, sincerity, wisdom and all the other qualities—claimed, by implication, to be the monopoly of the various contenders for political office—to run capitalism in such a way as to eradicate poverty, slums, unemployment, violence, etc. That organisation is the World Socialist Movement. It explains how capitalism is the cause of the problems wage and salary workers face today and how only socialism will provide the framework within which they can be solved for good. It points out how, in modern political conditions, the way to socialism is through the democratic political action of a majority of convinced socialists using the ballot box and parliament to win political control. It exposes as futile the policy of trying to deal with social problems by means of reforms of capitalism and shows that nationalisation is merely state capitalism. The relatively backward countries present no barrier to the immediate establishment of socialism throughout the world, the WSM explains, because the modern industrial system that now covers the world is quite capable of turning out an abundance of wealth for all the world’s population, wherever they live, to enjoy. And what about human nature? This too is answered by showing that the view that man is born lazy, greedy and aggressive is nonsense. Human behaviour depends on the society human beings live in and nothing anthropologists and other social scientists have found shows that human beings are incapable of co-operating on the basis of common ownership to produce an abundance of wealth from which they can take freely according to their needs.

The WSM. and its companion parties overseas, claim that, no more than all the other political parties could they run the present system to the satisfaction of all. Hence our struggle is not to win a mandate to run capitalism’s production for profit scheme, with or without amendments. Our struggle is to bring to our fellow members of the working class an understanding of the only alternative to capitalism, socialism, and provide a revolutionary party for the use of that knowledge. We do not ask the working class to vote for us to reform capitalism; we ask them to vote with us to abolish it!

Is Socialism necessary?

To-day we are faced with the necessity of abolishing servitude, of shattering every institution by which privilege and exploitation are upheld. Such a change implies, by its very nature, the conscious self-assertion of the mass, the workers themselves. Neither from above nor from below can we look for assistance in the hour of social revolution. That task obviously requires the active co-operation of the disinherited millions. So long as those millions are content to accept their enslaved state, so long as they are prepared to go on piling up wealth for their masters, the bosses can afford to smile at those who fancy themselves as the workers' leaders. On the other hand, once the mass awakens, once it realises its social power and importance, those same “leaders” will be swept away.

Some scorn on the educational work of the Socialist Party and it arises from the habit of looking only on the resources of the propagandists as the sole force helping the Party’s work. The influence of the social environment in shaping the outlook of the class, preparing it as a soil for the socialist seed, is ignored. The inertia of the mentality of the mass is insisted upon almost as a religious dogma. A psychological miracle is postulated. We are asked to believe that the human mind in the mass is an organism which fails to act according to the laws of its own development. The socialist reviewing history sees that as each class in turn has been thrust to the surface by economic evolution, that class has acquired a consciousness of its identity and interest. It has developed its own political organisation necessary to smash the institutions which stood in the way of its advance and to establish others which favoured it. By degrees the workers to-day are losing the illusions which bind them to their masters’ interests; they are groping, not for a lead as we are often told, but for knowledge which will enable them to dispense with "leaders.” It is the task of the Socialist Party to spread that knowledge.

The present-day means of production are capital, the modern form of property; that is to say, they are used by their owners, a small class in society, for the purpose of obtaining profit.

The capitalist, owning a certain sum of money, uses it to purchase machinery and raw material with a' view to selling the product at a profit. For this purpose he needs to buy a special commodity, labour-power, which, applied to the raw material and machinery, produces useful articles of a value greater than that of the combined, value of the original factors. The value of the labour-power used is determined by the time socially necessary to reproduce it. This applies to all commodities. Labour-power, however, plays the active part in the creation of value, and consequently of surplus value, which is that part of the value created which is kept by the employers. Surplus value is that part of the product left over after paying for labour-power and the cost of raw materials, wear and tear, etc.

Now, how comes it that the capitalist finds this extremely useful commodity, labour-power, to hand? The labourers have no means of living except by the wages they can earn. The land, factories, railways, etc., are owned by the capitalist class. The majority of members of society to-day are propertyless. In order to live, therefore, they must sell the only commodity they possess, their own energy.

The separation of the labouring class from their means of life was a prolonged process in history. The enclosure of common lands, the forcible ejection of the peasantry, the introduction of large-scale workshops, and later on of machine-factories, all played their part in making the workers dependent upon their present-day masters. At the same time, all other classes but these two have vanished from social life. Of the aristocracy and middle-classes of the mediaeval world, nothing is left but their titles and prejudices. The capitalist class preserve both as a means of displaying their power and duping the workers.

To-day, therefore, the social stage is set for the struggle between the last two classes to emerge in.the course of social evolution.

To-day, however, the means of production unite the workers-in vast world-wide organisations. In the effort to cope with the effects of the capitalist system the workers develop a measure of solidarity undreamt of under the systems of former ages. Railways, post, printing press and platform enable ideas to spread with greater rapidity than ever.

The struggle between the capitalists and their wage-slaves over the wealth produced by the latter results in ever-worsening conditions for them. Every improvement in machinery or methods strengthens the owning class by increasing the number of unemployed and the competition for jobs. This competition enables the capitalists to push wages down ever nearer to the physical limit, the bare subsistence level.

For the workers, therefore, there can be but one hope—a complete change in the ownership of the means of production and in the motive for which industry is carried on. The interests of the capitalist class lead that class to fortify their position by every means in their power. The interests of the workers demand that they shall attack that position. The mature social character of modern industry has rendered poverty unnecessary and a drag upon further development.

With the abolition of private ownership the profit-seeking motive will cease to operate. This is what our capitalist opponents mean when they say that there will be no incentive under Socialism. They can conceive of no other incentive. The workers, however, will still need food, clothing and shelter, and, having in their hands the necessary means, will go on producing these things in greater abundance than ever. The productive forces, freed from control by competing interests, will be utilised by society as a whole in accordance with a common plan, democratically determined in the interest of all.

Science and art to-day are the hired mistresses of Capitalist interests. Adulteration and advertisement of articles of sale, these are their most obvious functions. The elaboration of instruments of murder and plunder, and the idealisation of such processes on a national scale, are others.

With the freeing of the workers, science and art will acquire new meanings; they will become vested with a social purpose. Knowledge and beauty will be embodied in the actual material environment as well as the brains and bodies of mankind.

Women will no longer be under the necessity of providing heirs for property nor embryo hirelings for the labour market. Secure in a social heritage they will no longer need to offer their sexual attractions in return for the means of subsistence. Common property in the means of production will involve, therefore, the disappearance of both vice and virtue, dull respectability and its garish complement, monogamy and prostitution.

Thus every human being from birth onward will acquire a new social status. His or her own development will provide the basis for the maximum degree of social efficiency. The interests of society and individual are only antagonistic under a system based upon private property. Consequently the ethical conflict which forms the basis of moral codes will likewise disappear. Where the interests of each and all. are identical, abstract moralising will be simply so much waste of time. The object of existence will be to be happy, the place to be happy will be here, and the means of happiness will be to hand for all. Hence none will need to seek in the realm of shades for the forces with which to guide their lives. A life hereafter will no longer offer consolation for non-existent misery; while ghosts and gods will become as meaningless as fairies and hobgoblins. A rational outlook will accompany a rationally-ordered social life.

There remains to be considered the central power of the capitalist, i.e., the State; its seizure by a revolutionary working-class cannot fail to alter its entire character. From an instrument for maintaining private property it will become the agent of its abolition. Wrenched from the control of their present masters, the armed forces will be reserved only so long as any danger of counter-revolution remains. 

As the reorganisation of society proceeds, the need for repression of anti-social elements, the relics of the dying order, will gradually disappear. The political character of society, that is, its organisation for the purpose of government, will give way to economic functions. The administration of things in the interests of all will render unnecessary the constant supervision of personal relations by the public power. Once these personal relations lose their pecuniary basis and become purely voluntary, their arbitrary regulation by an outside force becomes absurd. Hence it is clear that the entire organisation of society as we know it to-day will be sprung into the air with the uprising of the working-class. What will take its place we can only express in the most general terms. The mission of the workers is to destroy the existing obstacles to their own development. For that purpose we call upon them to organise into a political party in opposition to all forces assisting to maintain the present social order. 

Demand Tomorrow Today

What is socialism? If we are socialists, what are we actually striving for? 

The Socialist Party conceives of socialism as the next stage of social evolution. The builders of the socialist society of the future will be the socialist generations themselves. The Socialist Party refrains from offering these future generations any instructions or blueprints. Auguste Blanqui, the French revolutionist, said: “Tomorrow does not belong to us.” We recognise that. The people in the future society will be wiser than we are. We also assume that they will be superior to us, in every way, and that they will know what to do far better than we can tell them. 

The Socialist Party can only point out the general direction of development, and we should not try to do more. But the prospect of socialism and what the future socialist society will look like is a question of interest and has a great importance. We trace some of the broad outlines of probable future development; the general direction, if not the details. Socialism will undoubtedly bring about a revolutionary transformation of human activity and association in all fields. There is the necessary evolutionary reorganisation of the labour process and the premise for a society of shared abundance.

The World today is full of stark and bewildering contradictions. The greatest industrial and agricultural power in history cannot feed, house and provide a decent livelihood for millions. Countless others sweat and toil away all their lives just to survive while billionaires squander fortunes on pet projects such as spaceships. Poverty and economic insecurity exist alongside affluence and extravagance. Politicians say they want international cooperation and peace, but they continue to build mighty military machines. Politicians endlessly speak about the sanctity of the family and morality. Yet the world suffers social decay. Violence against women and their sexual exploitation are unmatched. Mass media may be very sophisticated technically, but offer not much more than fantasy and escapism. Real life, in contrast, cries out for work for the welfare of humanity.

What is the reason for these contradictions between the promises, the potential of this society, and its stark reality? Why is there such an agonising gap between what is and what could be! The answers to these questions cannot be found in cynical condemnations of “human nature” or apologies about the “way things are.” No!

 Capitalism, a system of exploitation, violence, racism and war, the social system under which we live, is responsible for the contradictions in society. Capitalism thrives on the private ownership and control of society’s wealth and production – production involving the interconnected efforts of millions of working people. The super-rich have one basic goal in life: to make more and more profits, and they accomplish this by dominating the economics, politics, and cultural life. The capitalists will throw workers out into the streets to starve, promote violent racism, and build a military arsenal that can destroy the world several times over – anything for profits! This is an irrational and unjust system. But life does not have to be this way.

We can improve our lives and we can eliminate exploitation and capitalist injustice, by overturning the capitalist system. We can replace capitalism with a rational and humane system – socialism. Socialism is a social system where social wealth is genuinely controlled by society and for the benefit of society; where the common good, not profits, becomes the chief concern. Such an economic and political transformation will be radical, but a revolutionary solution is what it will take to bury the miseries of capitalism. The socialist revolution has become a historical necessity and possibility. There is no other choice today but for the working people to organise to struggle and win socialism.

 Socialism will qualitatively improve the lives of the working and oppressed peoples of the World. If the working people, and not the corporations, controlled the great resources of our society, we could improve all our lives. We could have a society which lays the basis for the equality of all. We could live in a World that is not preparing constantly for war and environmental self-extinction. These are the hopes that encourage the Socialist Party forward. The first 1% takes forever, 10% is like waiting for a sneeze – you know it’s inevitable but it takes longer than you think after that to 50% happens incredibly fast.

The Socialist Option

We neither delude nor attempt to delude anybody with fake promises. Neither do we buoy them up with false hopes. We ask only for votes from those who were prepared to endorse the position set out in our manifesto in its entirety. We do all that was humanly possible to prevent any but the class-conscious recording their votes for us. No other party putting forward candidates in any election can say as much or nearly as much. To them, therefore, every X on the ballot paper is of an unknown quantity. But we can say with truth that there is very little of the unknown quantity about our votes, they were votes for principles—class-conscious votes.

Our critics condescendingly repeat, parrot like, the formulae: “Don’t ask for the moon. You must be prepared to work with anybody who is going even a little way in your direction. It is nonsense to talk of revolution. You must work for your socialism in small doses, such as nationalisation as practical steps .” Our critics seeks socialism on the instalment plan. Reformist deny the class struggle, mistaking the progressive reorganisation of production for the progressive improvement in the lot of the working class, and ignores the fact that the fruits of increased organisation of production are denied to the wage-slaves. The great problems would, however, be untouched by the majority of the reforms proposed. Various sections of the exploiting class would benefit, but, even though these reforms were inscribed upon the tablets of the law, the workers would remain competitive wage slaves and a subject class. We have always to remember that all energy spent on these side-tracks is lost to the great movement forward. 

The simplest characterisation of a socialist mode of production is that, unlike all class societies, there is no ruling class that extracts surplus labor from the direct producers. Socialism means simply post-capitalism, an economy that disallows private property of the means of production and has no social divisions.

Our mission is simple. We have to proceed with our educational propaganda until the working class have understood the fundamental facts of their position—the facts that because they do not own the means by which they live they are commodities on the market, never bought unless the buyers (the owners of the means of life) can see a profit to themselves in the transaction, always sold when the opportunity offers because in that only can the necessaries of life be obtained. We have to emphasise the fact that no appreciable change is possible in the working-class condition while they remain commodities, and that the only method by which the alteration can be wrought is by the working class taking the means of life out of the hands of those who at present hold them, and whose private ownership is the cause of the trouble. Before this can occur the workers will have to understand the inevitable opposition of interests between them and the capitalist class, who, because of their ownership of the means of life, are able to exploit them, so that they will not make the mistake of voting into power, as they have always done hitherto, the representatives of the interests of those owning the means of life, because those who dominate political power dominate also the armed forces that keep the working class in subjection. Therefore are we in opposition to all other political parties, holding on irrefutable evidence, that these other parties are confusing what must be clear to working-class minds before a change can be effected. This is our mission, and we shall conduct it with all the energy we have at our command. 

The State is, by its very nature, a fundamentally coercive set of institutions which must be removed immediately before anything like socialism can be established". The big question is: how? How can the State be removed? Some anarchists share our aim of a state-free society of common ownership and popular participation where the principle of “from each according to their abilities, to each according to their needs" will apply and where money will be redundant. This is the view put forward, in the past, by such anarchists as Kropotkin, Rudolf Rocker and Alexander Berkman and. today, by Murray Bookchin. The main differences between us and them is over how to get to a class-free, stateless, money-free society. We favour majority democratic action on the grounds that the establishment of a society based on voluntary co-operation and popular participation has to involve such co-operation and participation (i.e. democratic methods) and say that when such a majority comes into being it can use existing political institutions (the ballot box and parliament) to establish a socialist/ communist society. They are opposed to this, but are not able to offer a viable alternative. The anarcho-communists pose a spontaneous mass popular upsurge, the anarcho-syndicalists a general strike and mass factory occupations—both of which ignore the State and the need to at least neutralise it before trying to change society from capitalism. Can we work with them? Well, if they can abandon their prejudice against democratic political action via elections, we invite them to join us in campaigning for a cooperative commonwealth.

We can only think of three possible ways of achieving a socialist society, two of which in our view wouldn’t work. The first would be to try to smash the State in an armed uprising. To do this the revolutionaries would have to be able to defeat militarily the forces of the State and so have to build up their own army, organised, as armies must be on a hierarchical basis. In the event of victory this new coercive force would have to be dissolved; otherwise it would turn into a new State. And it would be back to square one. We have to say, however, that we see no prospect of an armed uprising being either successful or even likely in the developed capitalist parts of the world. In fact, for countries like Britain, it's a quite mad idea.

A second possibility would be to refuse to co-operate with the State, to withdraw support from it so that it would just become an empty shell. It makes more sense than trying to defeat the State militarily but, to succeed, it would require the support of the overwhelming majority of the population.

But why not take the third way of using existing electoral and semi-democratic institutions—which, imperfect as they are and must be under capitalism, do still allow a majority to get its way—to win control of the State. Not, as you seem to think, to form some "socialist government" or "workers' state", but to dismantle it, by lopping off its coercive features and retaining and democratising any useful administrative features? That would be much easier, more direct and less risky. Which is why we favour it.

As Rosa Luxemburg contended, until a socialist revolution is successful, the most important result of any struggle is the building of working-class self-confidence and organisation which expresses an understanding of self-emancipation of the working class as both means and end

A Manifesto for World Socialism

Yet every day our cause becomes clearer and the people more clever – Joseph Dietzgen, Social Democratic Philosophy

Capitalism is a system of violence. Poverty is built into its operation. The struggle for a livable planet is a life-and-death issue. Corporate greed has polluted our air, turned our soil toxic and poisoned our waters. Our survival necessitates social control of technology and production and the elimination of the blind consumerism that causes us to squander so many of the world's resources needlessly. The environmental movement holds revolutionary potential. The threat to the environment touches everyone. The need to deepen their understanding of the relationship between humanity and the rest of nature. People will have to change how they live and how society is organised. We believe in a socialism where fulfillment will be found in the relationships among people and not in the consumption of things. Only conscious socialist planning by all of society can make this a reality.

Without revolutionary organisation, we cannot advance the revolutionary movement. As working people, we need our own party to fight for our interests, to help unify our struggles and to enable us to bring about socialism. The Socialist Party's job is to continue the work of socialist propaganda at all times without fear or compromise. We point our fellow-workers to a new world, the cooperative commonwealth. When they want it it is within their grasp. If they have to fight for it with only a fraction of the courage, sacrifice and determination they fight the quarrels of their masters, then no combination of powers, even were they a thousand times more powerful than they are, could stand against it. New movements will arise which promise an easy road to the new world. There will be disappointments and set-backs. But out of the struggles and their lessons there will be some who will learn, and they will add to the strength of the socialist movement, preparing the way for the inevitable time when masses must accept the socialist message. Historically, the stage has not yet been reached when workers in large numbers grasp the socialist's message. But it can be hastened the more our message is spread. It is the business of all socialists to work for this end. It is your job if you are a socialist, to lend a helping hand in every possible way and so assist the movement to take all the shocks and use all the opportunities that the future may hold for it. socialism is an historical necessity thrown up by the economic and social development of centuries. The alternative to it is chaos and conflict. As socialists we are conscious agents of the process of history.

The Socialist Party's aim is to abolish poverty. That can be done only by abolishing the system based on class division—those who possess but do not produce and those who produce but do not possess.

The reformer does not want to abolish poverty in the only way in which it can be done. Instead he wants to diminish poverty or remove some of the features that result from poverty. The most fatuous form this desire takes is to be found in the recurrent schemes for keeping rich and poor, but mixing them up a little—just as a defender of slavery might dwell on the beautiful thought of occasional friendly gatherings of slaves and slave owners.

There is, however, no indication that our rulers can cure unemployment. The capitalist employs a person for the purpose of producing a profit. If he or she can make no profit, he will not hire the worker, but will fire him or her, and so the unemployed army is created and will number millions, as our experience has shown us prior to the war.

The socialist way is to cure unemployment by socialising the machines and factories so that no man can be hired or fired by a capitalist owner, who now is solely concerned with a profit. Under Socialism, there would be no private owner to dictate to labour, and as a corollary there would he no profit. A man would have the right to work and the right to live. There would be no inequality of income, no money required to buy goods, and the wealth produced would be freely consumed by its creators, that is, the entire population. The workers alone have the power to change the world, provided they understand and apply the socialist remedy, i.e., of expropriating the machines and factories from their masters and making them into social property.

A Socialist Party does not waste time and energy chasing reforms. It seeks political power for the sole purpose of abolishing capitalism. The socialist ideal is, of course the substitution of collective ownership and control for capitalistic ownership and control with the consequent extinction of exploitation altogether. The Left are for state capitalism or collective exploitation. We are not concerned with state capitalism. We are concerned with socialism which is the negation of capitalism. Consequently state capitalism cannot be the ideal of any socialist. Ergo those who preach state capitalism or collective exploitation are not socialists.

It has always been the contention of Socialist Party that:

1. Capitalism, wherever it operates, despite differences in climate, language and culture, produces the same set of conditions from which inevitably flow the same problems. This is not to say that conditions are everywhere identical under capitalism; different areas are often undergoing different stages of capitalist evolution, depending on historical background. However, when Industrialism comes, late or early, capitalism comes with it: they are bound up in each other.
2. Capitalism, desiring always a submissive working class, seeks everywhere to condition the people: through religion, universities, the media of disseminating thought and ideas.
3. Despite the constant effort in this direction, there exists, invariably in capitalist society, groupings that contradict and are in opposition to capitalist society (where it hurts them) and towards one another.

Don’t like the world as it is? Imagine something different. The proposed alternative society to capitalism can only be socialism. What is involved is suppressing the production of exchange values for the benefit of the capitalist minority and replacing it with the production of use values for the satisfaction of real human needs, democratically determined. There is no other possible choice, no other possible alternative to this mode of production.

Workers World Unity

The SNP's opened in Aberdeen

The Socialist Party has always claimed that at the bottom of all war there is an economic cause. Under capitalism politics and economics are often divided in workers’ minds. Declaring “spheres of influence” really means exclusive possession of foreign markets and trade privilege. Capitalists must find some means of enlisting people to fight their wars. That means is nationalism. Economic causes are, of course, the root of wars. But today it is easier than ever to obscure this fact. Nationalism is the cloak behind which the economic causes work. Nationalism is the best disguise for the intrigues and machinations of capitalists. As Herman Goering said in 1945: “Naturally, the common people don't want war...but after all it is the leaders of a country who determine the policy, and it is always a simple matter to drag the people along, whether it is a democracy, or a fascist dictatorship, or a parliament, or a communist dictatorship. Voice or no voice, the people can always be brought to the bidding of the leaders. That is easy. All you have to do is to tell them they are being attacked, and denounce the pacifists for lack of patriotism and exposing the country to danger. It works the same in every country.”

Nationalism is always dangerous and creates an opening to chauvinism and xenophobia.

Nationalism holds that members of a national group, regardless of class have a communal integrity that is stronger than the ties between workers of different nations. Nationalism always claims certain virtues as the peculiar, exclusive possession of certain nations. If individuals make such claims, they are laughed to scorn. Why — with what logic — may nations make such claims? Nationalism claims that the culture belonging to one nation is distinct from that belonging to any other. This was so in the past, but the natural evolution of mankind is making it less so. Increased means of communication — the mass media, the internet — have caused nations to exchange ideas until today there is no essential difference between any one of the countries of the world. Even language is tending to become universal with the prevalence of English as a second language. More people understand each other today than ever before. It is only by artificial that nationalism is kept alive. Nationalism is an unmitigated curse. It leads inevitably to chauvinism and to national aggression. It leads to a patriotism for the soil, for the particular bit of the earth’s surface on which a particular person has been born. Capitalism versus socialism is not a crucial issue to the nationalist.

Socialism adopts a policy of unrelenting antagonism toward nationalism. Socialism recognises and emphasises that the class struggle determines all our action – that the national ideology is a fetter upon the emancipation of the proletariat – and that the social revolution is international in scope and purpose. We value the international unity of the working class. So we must fight for the closest possible alliance of workers irrespective of any-reshaping of the frontiers of individual states. We do not, and cannot, favour a native-born employing class over the foreign version. A divided international working class, split by nationalism can never build its strength to challenge the capitalist system of exploitation.

Liberate minds, not nations

Fight the Good Fight - Class Struggle

"Any city, however small, is in fact divided into two, one the city of the poor, the other of the rich; these are at war with one another." - Plato

The class struggle is a struggle between collective Capital, i.e. the class of capitalists or employers, and collective Labour, i.e. the working class. A class is a category with common economic interests, the interests defining the class. The interests of employers and workers are diametrically opposed. The capitalists’ interest is to continue private ownership of the means of production, and to appropriate as much as he can of the social product (wealth) which is currently produced by the working class. The working class resist this process by taking defencive action, mainly through trade unions and strike action. Their economic interests can only lie in the removal of the conditions which give rise to this struggle. This means the abolition of capitalism and the replacement of private ownership by common ownership (Socialism). It is not possible to reconcile these opposing interests. The class struggle is an organic part of the capitalist system of production and consequently is inseparable from its operation.

The whole social and economic system rests on the capitalists’ control of the political machinery. That control in turn is based on the support of the majority of the population who either actively or by default vote for political parties who propose to continue and administer the capitalist method of production. The Socialist Party's immediate task is to impart socialist knowledge. Capitalism can last only as long as the majority of the workers are prepared to preserve it, and as long as it lasts the so-called abnormal periods of economic blizzards and wars will continue. These crises are normal to capitalism, and it is the duty of workers to grasp this fact and work to end this system. The social problems we are troubled with to-day can be solved only when everyone has free access to the means of life; when goods are produced solely for use and freely distributed amongst the members of society. Socialism offers all that is worth-while to the workers. It is an historical necessity, and it is in their interests, and we earnestly ask them to give serious thought to it as the solution to their problems. Only from the workers' class-conscious political activities can Socialism be achieved, and war, want and insecurity be banished from the earth for ever. Mere resistance to government policies is insufficient as it cannot even achieve its purpose because it cannot rid the world of capitalism. It is perfectly clear that the class struggle is ultimately a struggle for political power, the issue being common ownership vs. private ownership. There is no half-way house. This is the revolutionary proposition, and this is the sole issue upon which the Socialist Party seek political support.

It is not the function of a Socialist Party to advocate, support, or oppose, or otherwise participate in reformist issues. This includes agitation or protest against the withdrawal of any reform previously granted. Reformist schemes designed to improve the lot of workers under capitalism can never express socialist political activity in the class struggle, or have any prospect of achieving a socialist revolution, and it is a waste of the workers’ time and energy to attempt to improve capitalism. But instead of workers using their votes to abolish Capitalism, they use the same vote to keep it going, even if on a temporary reform basis. This is not in their interests, either in the short or long term, as history has shown. Whilst the “welfare of the working class” under capitalism is not worth the effort wasted on trying to enhance it, the political welfare of the working class is our concern, and ours alone. This is why we are hostile to those political parties and groups, be they right-wing or left-wing, who mislead the workers by pretending that their real interests lie in making capitalism more comfortable.

Reforms are not revolutionary, and it is highly debatable whether or not they are effective in the long or short term. The main point which is sometimes forgotten is that the introduction or the withdrawal of any legislative measures endorsing reforms depend ultimately on the will of the capitalists who control the political machinery. It is they alone who have the final word, and their attitude will be determined by their economic and political interests and not on the particular merits of the reform, no matter what the social need. The struggle to obtain or retain reforms, i.e. changes in capitalism made by and through the machinery of government in such fields as housing, pensions, health, education, , or political activity over prices, and high rents, is not part of the class struggle, because such activity accepts and favours the retention of private property. It is no excuse to justify this on the grounds that the workers are unable or unwilling to understand socialism, and that their lives should be made a little easier in the meantime. This is the Gospel of Despair. By the same political act (the vote) the workers can obtain socialism. What is lacking is socialist understanding. If that is so, then it is the plain duty of those who do understand to devote their entire activity to the spread of socialist ideas. The Socialist Party does not waste time and energy chasing reforms. It seeks political power for the sole purpose of abolishing capitalism.

The struggle for higher wages, etc. is not reformist. It is an aspect of the class struggle. It is not the will of the capitalist that determines what wages he shall pay. As the product of labour is divided into Wages and Profits one cannot relatively expand without the other relatively contracting. Almost invariably the employers are opposed to higher wages, or shorter working hours, which is, in effect, the same thing. More money for less labour. Economic forces decide this issue. The Strike by workers, the Lockout by employers, wage increases are gained against the will of the employers, and wage reductions enforced against the will of the workers. This is open class conflict. Workers who take part in strike action, either inside or outside trade unions, are not committed to any particular political point of view. Anarchists, Socialists, Communists, Labourites, Tories, will unite for the common objective — not through choice, but through necessity. They do not have to squander their votes to get higher wages as is the case with reforms.