Socialism is Community

There is nothing like victory to give workers confidence. Under capitalism, you don't always win even if you fight hard. The system is weighted in favour of the capitalists, and it takes a lot of hard struggle for workers to win battles in the class war. For the past couple of centuries the workers have been pressing on. And the capitalists have been pushing back. With their police scab-herders and their anti-union laws and their puppet Judges and their parties of Left and Right who seek to run the wages system, our class enemies have pushed and pushed. The tragedy is that workers are  still fighting, when we can muster the confidence to fight, for the crumbs from the cake we ourselves bake. We should learn from the events that it is the wages system itself which is our enemy; only its abolition will mark the true victory of the working class.

 

The Socialist Party repudiates the myth that humans are inherently anti-social and uncooperative, and state emphatically that human nature is no barrier to a sane, socialist society. It rejects the economics of capitalism, which assert that we need buying and selling and prices to determine what people need; price-free access to all goods and services for everyone is the only way to allocate goods efficiently. We are seeing again the intensifying of human hardship side-by-side with surpluses of goods which the market cannot absorb. Which should just serve to remind us that capitalism is still a system of bitter contradictions which no government can iron out. They will disappear only when capitalism itself is abolished and socialism takes its place.

 

We know that capitalism will give workers all over the world insecurity and unemployment. It will grind out poverty and restriction and condemn millions of people to live, drab, inadequate lives. It may even give us frights like a war over Ukraine or South China Sea.

 

Socialism will finish the insecurities and the anomalies which blight our lives from one end of the year to another. The best we can wish ourselves is that the world working class will get enough understanding of society to throw off the system which restricts and condemns them and replace it with one in which happiness and plenty are no longer an empty dream.

 

The inadequacies of capitalism will play their part in bringing them to this. So to our readers in the slums nd in the other drab, dingy working class homes; to the unemployed and to those who know that their living is insecure; to those who hate and fear war: to all those who wish and work for a world fit for humans to live in. Many people insist that socialism means we would all have to conform while capitalism opposes this and encourages individuality. The truth is that capitalism dislikes individuality and loves conformity.

 

In a war between dictatorship and democracy, we are not indifferent in regard to the issue. It is plain that under a dictatorship you are robotised: you do not think, you obey; under a democracy you imbibe ideas, carefully fostered, which result in causing you to believe you are following your own inclinations when safeguarding ruling class interests.The crimes of dictators smell to high heavens, and the hypocrisy of the leaders of democracy arouse disgust amongst those to whom working class interests are paramount. 

 

We much prefer a democracy to a dictatorship. We freely acknowledge that we prefer the latter, because, under a Democracy, there is a better chance for the laws of social evolution to work themselves out without unnecessary violence. We have been brought up that way, but when we see the dangling carrots held in front of the donkey to induce it to pull the load, we are wise to the game. In peace or war, so long as capitalism shall last, the wage slave is doomed to drag his or her heavy burden, and to receive as a recompense just about sufficient to do so.

 

Do the workers have the political capacity to overthrow capitalism? From its very beginning the Socialist Party has answered in the affirmative.It has taken the workers longer to gain power than we foresaw, but the class wars and industrial conflicts in which the workers have the opportunity to learn great political lessons have neither ceased nor diminished. This provides the workers with greater, large-scale opportunities to learn, for instance, that capitalism has nothing to offer them but mass misery. The bankruptcy of capitalism, which is increasingly evident to the workers, is a vital factor in any consideration of revolutionary prospects. Workers are far from the “impotence’’ attributed to them and there exists sufficient evidence of a vast reservoir of revolutionary energy stored up.

 

 The Socialist Party says that workers in Britain or Russia, or the United States, or France and elsewhere throughout the world, can solve the problems of poverty in a world of potential plenty, by organising to establish a new and completely different form of a society of production of wealth solely for use and the satisfaction of needs. Such a society would not be Heaven on Earth or Utopia; but it would soon tackle, and solve, the basic problems thrown up by capitalism. And that is more than enough.

Social Democracy is Socialism

 

Social Democracy is but another term for socialism. The words "freedom and equality" are part of the political vocabulary of each and every one of us. But if asked: What is freedom? and you will be told, "Freedom means freedom of opinion, freedom of the press, freedom of association and assembly".

Ask: What is equality? and you will be told: "All citizens are equal before the law, with no difference between the high-born and the yokel."

Such definitions have nothing to do with true freedom or true equality. 

A revolution in one country is certainly not feasible. Also from an economic point of view. An economic crisis cannot remain isolated in one country. It transcends as you know all countries. The system is international. 

The Socialist Party is positive and constructive. It stands for complete political and industrial democracy. We earnestly urge all fellow workers to join us to bring order out of chaos and happiness out of misery. The struggle of the proletariat for emancipation must be fought along political lines, using in the immediate struggle the parliamentary phase of political action by electing where possible our representative to political office. Our first aim must be winning to our cause the mass of the proletariat by propagating revolutionary principles. The great goal toward which we all strive, namely, industrial democracy – that is, that the working class may own, control and manage the industries for themselves.  Socialists reason workers will be willing to fight for their complete emancipation from capitalist wage slavery. The only question is: When?

Failing to understand the functions of the state, workers do not know that as long as the capitalist class are in control of it they must put into effect all legislation, and we can be certain that they are not going to legislate to benefit the working class. We, the Impossibilists, have always been charged by them for not being constructive. They were the “practical” socialists. What have they done that is constructive? These “socialists” who were always crying “constructive work” have performed no constructive work themselves. They can point to nothing that they have done that has been of any material benefit to the socialist movement. As for performing any educational work or developing the members of the movement, they have done nothing.

Capitalist Exploitation.

 The essence of the capitalist system is the ownership and control of the materials and tools of production and distribution by a small class whose legal title to the lands, forests, mines, railroads, quarries, mills, factories, and other industrial and commercial utilities and plants gives them control over the lives of the working masses. The workers subsist in a new form of slavery, wherein labour-power is paid for by wages, and the bare chance to live depends upon employment by some capitalist master. Employment depends upon the production by the worker of a margin of value over and above what he receives for his labour-power. The capitalist master has no liability on account of the wage-worker, except that of payment for labour-power on a time or piece basis.

The concentration of ownership and control of the economic resources of the nation in the hands of a few individuals or corporations means even more arbitrary control of the lives of the working masses by a decreasing capitalist class. It means artificial manipulation of production for maximum returns on investment, that is, the attempt to limit production so as to maintain the desired level of prices. Not only lessened production and higher prices result from the very progress of capitalism — by the innate character of the system — but also constantly recurring periods of interrupted production with hundreds of thousands of workers thrown out of their only means of livelihood, the blind, servile victims of a system which response to but one impulse — profit.

If there is anything the capitalist class likes and which it tries to bring about, it is to have the workers resort to armed insurrection methods. Engels’ preface to The Civil War in France, gives the death blow to the advocates of physical force. After pointing out that the development of capitalism had rendered barricade fights and armed insurrection obsolete from the revolutionist’s standpoint; after characterising the revolutionist who would select the working-class districts as the starting point for a violent upheaval as a lunatic; Engels goes on to say: “Does the reader now understand why the ruling class, by hook or by crook, would get us where the rifle pops and the sabre slashes? Why, today, do they charge us with cowardice because we will not, without further ado, get down into the street where we are SURE OF OUR DEFEAT IN ADVANCE? Why are we so persistently importuned to play the role of cannon fodder?”

 The SPGB is opposed to violence or the advocacy of violence in the labour movement because it knows that such tactics are playing right into the hands of the capitalist class. It is not cowardice that dictates the SPGB position but common sense and it is not heroism or bravery that dictates the advocacy of violence by the Workers Party. It is not heroism that makes a fool rock a boat in deep water, it is idiocy. We can go a step further than Engels and say that he who advocates violence today is either a lunatic or a police spy.

The SPGB alone of all the organisations on the political field has a concrete platform, clear, concise, and logical, and it is the only one possible of inaugurating. The SPGB alone points the way to freedom.

What we are striving for is a transformation of the foundations of society, that is, the emancipation of labour.

Understanding the Socialist Party

 

The Socialist Party is made up of socialists who share a unity of agreement on simple generalisations. Note that we are not engaged in a competition with other organisations in a contest to emancipate the workers, because we recognise that the workers are fully capable of emancipating themselves, once they become socialists. Just for the above reasons, it is quite unlikely that there ever would ever be two socialist parties in any one country. The SPGB would have no other alternative but to merge with any other group of real socialist workers appearing on the scene organised for the same purpose as we are. On the other hand, we do oppose all the so-called working-class parties which compromise with capitalism and do not uphold the socialist case. When the workers become socialists, they will not need a vanguard party to lead them. They will organise consciously and politically to emancipate themselves. Its bond of comradeship and unity is rooted in the barest minimum of socialist principles which may be summarised as socialism is a product of social evolution; the socialist revolution is inherently democratic because of its nature of being conscious, majority, and political; and that socialism is based on the social relations of a community of interests between all the members of society and society as a whole. There can hardly be any compromise on these three general principles. Further, a socialist is one who recognises and realises that capitalism can no longer be reformed or administered in the interest of society or of the working class; that capitalism is incapable of eliminating poverty, war, crises, etc.; and that the times call for arousing the majority to become socialists to inaugurate socialism, now possible and necessary.

The Socialist Party is made up of socialists who share a unity of agreement on the above simple generalisations. Note that we are not engaged in a competition with other organisations in a contest to emancipate the workers, because we recognise that the workers are fully capable of emancipating themselves, once they become socialists. Just for the above reasons, it is quite unlikely that there ever would ever be two socialist parties in any one country. We would have no other alternative but to merge with any other group of real socialist workers appearing on the scene organised for the same purpose as we are. On the other hand, we do oppose all the so-called working-class parties which compromise with capitalism and do not uphold the socialist case. When the workers become socialists, they will not need a vanguard party to lead them. They will organise consciously and politically to emancipate themselves.

 The companion parties of the World Socialist Movement can never grow so large that they will not be governed by membership. They delegate administrative and procedural work to committees, but the membership, as a whole, pass on motions of conference dealing with principles and policies (not routine housekeeping matters), which are always submitted to referenda. We don’t have leaders, only spokespersons and administrators.

 

The Socialist Movement

 

It is ridiculous to think of a rivalry between socialist parties competing to emancipate the workers. Should another genuine socialist party appear on the scene, immediate steps would be taken to merge. Herein lies the emphasis on the distinction between “socialist” in quotes and socialist in its scientific, revolutionary context. In fact, the thing that distinguishes the companion parties from all other alleged “socialist” parties is that we stand alone on being organised exclusively for the abolition of capitalism by the workers. Not all socialists are members of the companion parties. There are many, many socialists who are not attached to any socialist party. But this has no bearing on the historic nature of the socialist party. There are innumerable factors to account for individual socialists not being members of a socialist organization, but to focus on this out of its context is only to confuse and confound the understanding of the nature of a socialist party.

 

 There have been ups and downs in membership, enthusiasm, and organisational work. Many of these situations can be traced to personality clashes, personal problems, disappointments leading to discouragement, and the fact that we are all human beings with human failings and limitations. Possibly the biggest factor is that we are few in numbers and turn in on ourselves, instead of outwards in much-needed organisational and propaganda activity. Situations do arise because of emotional stresses and strains. Differences have assumed paramount importance. The objectives of socialism itself are reflected in the very nature of our organisational procedures, in much the same way as the other “socialist” parties’ organisational procedures reflect their concepts of leadership, dictatorship, etc. This is the salient item to bear in mind: there is a justifiable fear of emasculating scientific, socialist principles, based upon the evidence of the real world. Were the doors opened wide to mere sympathisers and well-wishers, or those with non-socialist or even anti-socialist concepts, we would soon cease being a socialist party. Above all else, it is mandatory that a socialist party be made up of socialists.

 

The criterion of what constitutes a socialist is very simple. One does not have to be a Marxian scholar to be a socialist. So much for this, for the present, at least. The interesting thing is how small the memberships of the other so-called revolutionary parties are. It makes shambles of the misconception that the WSM is small because of our procedures. It was not due to lack of activities, intolerance of really unsound, untenable ideas, or any of the favourite criticisms of the WSM; it was not for being “dogmatic and sectarian” that we lost members and influence. This is a historic and social phenomenon. The myriad parties of the Left all have serious declines in membership. Mainly, It can be ascribed to a public apathy that arises when high hopes raised by social reform programs only lead to disillusionment. The “socialist programmes” advocated by the “socialists’ of the Left were incapable of solving the problems confronting society because they never even came to grips with the root causes of those problems. (To do so would require a real socialist analysis.)

 

The appeal of the “socialist programmes” was easily adopted by the liberals and the right, alike. All the “socialist” organisations bemoaning that the capitalists were stealing their programmes only accentuates disgust and apathy with politics and politicians. It has become obvious that such programmes are bankrupt of any accomplishments except winning a chance to administer the status quo. On the other hand, the workers hardly ever hear the socialist case. On those rare occasions whenever they do, it often makes sense to them. A ferment is at work. What used to be nonsense is beginning to make sense. Socialist ideas are rising into view — not so much because of socialist campaigning but because of the lessons of experience. It is notorious indeed that more and more books, more and more articles.

WHO WE ARE

 

Socialists welcome critical and searching questions. Thinking is not and never has been a violation of socialist discipline. Socialists are not dogmatists and sectarians who are blindly and religiously faithful to socialist conclusions despite the lessons of unfolding experience. Should an examination of the real world prove the case for socialism to be invalid, it would be a serious reflection on those who continued to be socialists. That is why socialists are open-minded, in contrast to being broad-minded. They do not tolerate exploded myths and superstitions. Yet they should be patient with individuals groping to find out what the score is. Especially is this true in a day and age when the material conditions of existence are ripe for socialism with the sole exception of maturity of social and political thinking. The only thing standing in the way of socialism today is the lack of socialists.

The problem today is that of socialist education.  By its very nature, socialism is inherently democratic, i.e., it requires a conscious socialist majority. This cannot be overemphasiSed for it is the clue to socialist tactics and programs on the basis of historic necessity. Socialists are wary of the word, “radical.” Actually, socialists are not radicals in the common usage of the word. We are, rather, revolutionary. Under the heading of “radical” must be included a hodge-podge collection of confusions worse confounded with the added burden of being just nebulous, vaporous discontent based on blind misconceptions. What a company is included in the term “radical”. Of course, there is no question whatever that there is a need for “some sort of unity of understanding,” but that is the function of a socialist organisation, i.e., a socialist party. The nature — the very heart and core — of a socialist party is that it is not for the workers. The party is not going to emancipate the workers or do anything for them. There is no dichotomy or separation of the workers and the party. 

Abraham Lincoln was on the flimsy ground when he spoke of “government of the people, by the people, and for the people,” because all governments are rooted in antagonisms of interests, it would be quite valid to say that the socialist party is the party of the workers, by the workers, and for the workers. The real socialist party cannot be apart and distinct from the working class; it has to be comprised of the whole human community. That is the general nature of any socialist party.

Without in any sense implying that quoting The Communist Manifesto is, of itself, proof of anything, nevertheless, the Manifesto phrases this matter very well: Section II starts off that (the party) “always and everywhere represent the interests of the movement as a whole” and ends with “the first step in the revolution by the working class is to raise the proletariat to the position of ruling class, to win the battle of democracy.” 

In other words, the work of emancipation, the transformation of capitalism into a socialist society, the transfer of the means of living from the hands of the parasites into the hands of society as a whole, is the conscious, majority, and political action of the working class — the socialist party. The state does exist; it is the central organ of power. Title and deed to its ownership rest in the political control by the ruling class. The state is the instrumentality of class control. When the workers finally wake up, they will use their party to change the “civitas” of propertied society into the “societas” of communal society.

Today, working-class understanding is at a very low ebb, therefore the membership in the SPGB is puny.

Coercion or Cooperation?

 

The word “government” is often confused with the word “administration.” It is a very common misconception until one understands that “government” is but a synonym for the “state,” that is, rulers and ruled; governors and governed. (Although all governments have a secondary function of administering social affairs, it is a secondary function that is subordinate to its primary function of ruling society in the interest of the ruling class.) Where the social relationships of private property exist, there is a need for state machinery (a government) to keep the people in check and under control, as well as to protect the national ruling class interests against the rivalries of foreign “enemies.” Thus, we have had governments in chattel slave, feudal, and capitalist societies. Primitive tribal societies were typically administered communally and had no governments, as such. 

Socialism is a class-free society, without rulers and ruled, a genuine democracy where there exists a real community of interests between all the members of society and society as a whole. It is a social administration of affairs where everyone cooperates in the common interests according to his abilities and desires; where human beings live useful, interesting and meaningful lives. To establish socialism the workers must first gain control of the powers of government through their political organisation. It is the recognition that the state is the central organ of power in the hands of the capitalist class. By gaining control of the powers of the state, the socialist majority is in a position to transfer the means of living from the parasites, who own them, to society, where they belong. This is the only function or need the working class has of the state/government. As soon as the revolution has accomplished this task, the state is replaced by the socialist administration of affairs. There is no government in a socialist society.

“Must we have leaders to obtain our object?” Some answers will be “Yes - to educate the workers politically and economically towards socialism ”

 But teachers are not leaders any more than writers or speakers are leaders. Their function is to spread knowledge and understanding so that the workers, the conscious majority, may emancipate themselves. Quite different from that we must have leaders (great men) to direct their followers (blind supporters) into a socialist society. Socialism is not the result of blind faith, followers, or, by the same token, vanguards and leaders. Nothing is more repugnant to socialism than conspiratorial tactics. Socialism is not possible without socialists. The seeming failures, the disappointments and discouragements, the slow growth, only indicate that socialist work is not an easy task. Our satisfaction is that the latent strength of the movement is that it makes sense, and when the great majority wake up and socialist ideas come of age, then socialism, a world fit for human beings, becomes invincible. The alternative facing us is socialism or chaos. 

Our task is primarily that of arousing socialist consciousness, on the basis of evidence and unfolding events, that capitalism has outlived its historic usefulness and is now ripe for burial; that socialism is no fanciful utopia, but the crying need of the times; and that we, as socialists, are catalytic agents, acting on our fellow workers and all others to do something about it as speedily as possible.


If another socialist organisation appeared on the scene, then the only possible action that we could take would be to make immediate overtures for a merger. We would offer them the open arms of comradely greetings and unity. The SPGB is not organised to do something for the working class. In fact, we are not organised in the interest of and on behalf of the working class. Sounds strange, does it? This is just the foundation of our position — The working class must organise, consciously and politically. Nobody can do anything for them but themselves. The working class, as socialists, must organise into a socialist party. The SPGB is the party of class-conscious socialists; it is the party of the class. Its small membership merely reflects the small number of class-conscious socialists. The real test of whether the SPGB is the party of the working class is to be found in examining the position of the SPGB to discover whether it is the sound, scientific analysis of the laws of motion of capitalism and the correct statement of the workers’ needs. So, again, it boils down to the question of its understanding. “Unity for socialism” has no meaning unless based on the common realisation that its sole object is to introduce socialism.

This is what socialism means

 

Let's define a socialist. It is not how scholarly he or she may be in Marxism and the sciences. He or she may never have read a word of Marx or socialist literature. He simply needs to realise that: 

1.  Capitalism can no longer be administered or reformed in the interest of the working class or of society. 

2. Capitalism is incapable of eliminating poverty, wars, crises, etc. 

3. Socialism can solve the social problems confronting society today since the material conditions are ripe for socialism, save the lack of a socialist majority.

All members of the WSM would agree upon the conscious, majority, political nature of the socialist revolution; the Materialist Conception of History; the Law of Value; the Class Struggle; attitudes on leadership, reformism, and religion; the general nature of socialism as a system of society.

 However, a socialist does not necessarily require an encyclopedic knowledge of Marxian economics.  Understanding Marx’s Capital is not an acid test of whether a person is a socialist or not.

The real test of socialist convictions hinges on such factors as capitalism cannot be reformed or administered in the interest of the working class or of society; Capitalism, as a social system, is in the interest of the ruling class (albeit that capitalism, historically, is an essential stage of social evolution); Socialism is the solution to the social problems and irreconcilable contradictions of capitalism; Socialism cannot be forced down the workers’ throats against their wishes; The socialist victory is dependant upon a determined, conscious socialist majority.

 These are the characteristics of a socialist; coupling of the head and the heart, theory coupled with action. A socialist is one who recognizes and realises that capitalism can no longer be reformed or administered in the interest of society or of the working class; that capitalism is incapable of eliminating poverty, war, crises, etc.; and that the times call for arousing the majority to become socialists to inaugurate socialism, now possible and necessary.”

Socialism is possible, necessary and practical today the moment the great majority become conscious of their interests. The notion that the workers are dumb is plain hogwash. They are confused, especially the “friends” of socialism, speaking in the name of socialism. It still remains the case that, aside from the feeble voices of the World Socialist Movement, the great mass of workers are not exposed to socialist fundamentals. Our task is hard enough as it is. But despite the discouragements and disappointments, it takes a heap of understanding to realize the forces working for socialism. The greatest ally we have is capitalism itself.

 The greatest teacher of all is experience. Eventually, all the groping and mistaken diversions into futile efforts of reforming and administering capitalism will run their course. People learn from their mistakes. Necessity is the latent strength of socialism. Truth and science are on the side of socialism. Nothing is stronger than an idea comes of age. (These are not trite clichés.) It is easy to be cynical of socialist efforts. But, with the world facing the alternative of socialism or chaos, you don’t have to be a cynic to realise that we are on the eve of significant social changes. Already, you have seen indications in this direction in the thinking of people everywhere. Our task is to be a catalyst, the triggering agent that transforms majority ideas from bourgeois into revolutionary ones. What better ambition is there for working people to forever put an end to poverty and privilege.

A Dope on Drugs

 UK Government minister responsible for drug laws, Kit Malthouse, who is responsible for crime and policing for the UK Government, told MSPs that he did not believe that poverty is an underlying cause of drug use. Malthouse said that “drugs and violence drive poverty, not that poverty drives them”.

The data from the National Records of Scotland revealed that “people in the most deprived areas were 18 times as likely to have a drug-related death as those in the least deprived areas”. 

The study found that the ratio has almost doubled in the space of 20 years.

In the early 2000s, those in the most deprived areas were around 10-times as likely to have a drug-related death as those in the least deprived areas.

UK minister criticised for 'condescending' view that poverty doesn't drive drug deaths (yahoo.com)

Socialism Now

 

We freely acknowledge the Russian Revolution and widespread post-war discontent of 1918 and 1919 did inspire large segments of workers, that fact and we but the parties of the World Socialist Movement nevertheless questioned whether a socialist revolution was taking place. In the light of subsequent events, the socialist movement would be a far greater force and factor today had it not been for the squandered efforts and illusions of the Bolshevik counterfeits as far as a genuine socialist revolutionary movement is concerned.

 The Communist Parties and all their various splinter groups, usually revolve around personalities and “leaders.” They are dominated by the concept of a vanguard of “professional cadres.” It is the responsibility of the vanguard to guide and lead its followers. They have the appeal of being conspiratorial in nature. They stir the emotions with their “grassroots” activities of organising demonstrations and protests on every issue. Their concepts of the “Dictatorship of the Proletariat” and the “Transitional Period” are reflected in what they call “Democratic Centralism.” The control of the organisation is from the top, who inform the membership of “the party line.”

What is the task of those dedicated to arousing their fellow workers to become socialists? It is, first of all, to help uproot superstitions and to spread knowledge and understanding. Only the workers can emancipate themselves. The only factor in all the material conditions of today that the SPGB can see standing in the way of socialism is the political ignorance of the workers. Our opposition to reforms and reformism are just because their objectives are palliative in nature and are fought for in order to make the system function more smoothly. Though we do not advocate reforms nor fight for reforms, that does not mean that we refuse to accept reforms, as though we could if we wanted to. Historically, reform activities have dissipated the earnest energies of so-called socialists from doing any socialist work, whatsoever. The need for reforms is a full-time all-consuming job.

Conditions are now ripe for socialism, i.e. production for use and where all mankind cooperate in the common social interests. In a sane world fit for human beings, the social forces breeding wars disappear. It is time for a breakthrough to society in harmony with the tremendous technological developments of the last 100 years. The SPGB is not going to do anything for the working class except to arouse their fervour, determination and enthusiasm for socialist objectives. The aroused class-conscious workers will use their party as the lever of emancipation. To summarise: All such activities still leave the job left to be done, the only job worthwhile and meaningful: making socialists. The acid test of socialism is found in the workings of the real world.

The bond that makes us as one and inspires us is the recognition that capitalism can no longer be reformed or administered in the interest of the working class or of society, and the understanding that conditions are now ripe for socialism, which is the solution for society’s problems. All that is lacking is a socialist majority. This is the essence of our principles.

Healthy Life Expectancy Falls

 The number of years people in Scotland can expect to live in good health has fallen again, according to new figures from the Healthy Life Expectancy 2018 - 2020. 

Healthy Life Expectancy is a key measure of health and wellbeing in Scotland.

 People in deprived communities have the fewest healthy years in life.

On average, they spend a third of their lives in poor health - 24 more years than those in the least deprived areas.

Across Scotland, healthy life expectancy was 60.9 years for males and 61.8 years for females.

These figures have dropped each year from 2018 to 2022 for females and for the past three years for males.

Statistician Maria Kaye-Bardgett said: "These figures continue a trend we have seen in recent years with healthy life expectancy falling for males and females."

The areas with the lowest number of years spent in good health were Inverclyde for males (54.4 years) and North Ayrshire for females (54.0 years).

With those in the most deprived areas also dying younger, they spent more than 33% of their lives in poor health. Those in the richest parts of Scotland lived about 15% of their lives in poor health.

Fewer years of good health expected in Scotland - BBC News