INTRODUCING SOCIALISM

 Politics has become such a dirty word that you could well stop reading this blog right now. But before you do, think about the recent conversations you’ve had. What were they about? 

Did you complain about the price of something which has gone up again?

Did you talk about problems with the Council, or with your mortgage, or with your wages?

Did your boss get you down again this week?

If you’re unemployed, were you depressed because you walked past shops and people who all seem to live on a separate planet? Or was it a row with a partner over money and unpaid bills?

Or did you argue with your kids just because you’re so tired and full of stress that anything sets you off?

 

If your week sounded anything like that, you're not alone.

 What happens in our lives is not entirely up to us, and when we talk about life we are also making political statements about how we would like things to be. Politics is only a dirty word because the politicians have made it into a game that you play in parliaments and score points off the opposition.

Their games are none of our concern, but our own lives matter and the politics of our lives must matter to us as well. This post is about politics, but don’t be put off by that. The things that worry you, that may be mentioned above, are the sort of politics we want to talk about. Not party politics, or 'real-politik'. but real life.

 

 Life is full of popular myths. One myth that is still around, and matters rather a lot, is the myth of 'common sense'.

If something is ’common sense', it is true. Many of the ideas we hear through the TV and newspapers are put in this way. We take them very much for granted. They are what is called "realism". Politicians are fond of "realism" and "common sense approaches". Nowadays you don't have to prove somebody wrong, you just call them "unrealistic" or "naive". Politicians have managed to make everybody else’s ideas sound childish and naive while they really understand all about 'common sense'. They should, they manufacture most of it.

The problems that we have in our lives don't get talked about by the papers or politicians. That is left to us, on our own, in pubs or among friends. Why do we have to work for bosses? What is the point of saving when inflation eats it all up? Why do people starve when supermarkets throw food away? But it's not 'common sense’ to talk about things that political leaders are not interested in.

Here are some examples of this 'Common Sense', and underneath, the feelings, or as they are more usually called the "Bad Attitudes" that a lot of people have about them. 

Common Sense: This is a prosperous country.

Bad Attitude: Where is all this prosperity when you're on the dole or three months behind with the mortgage?

Common Sense: If you want to 'make it', work hard and be thrifty. 

Bad Attitude: Like my parents did, and look at them. Besides, what's the point when some yuppie can make my life’s earnings in twenty minutes on the Stock Exchange? 

Common Sense: Other people are worse off than you. If you've got an ounce of decency you should be grateful, and give to charities.

Bad Attitude: Alright, I can't walk past a collecting box without feeling guilty, but however much I pay, the problems don't seem to go away. If anything they get worse. Why don't the government pay?

Common Sense: Politics is for politicians. I wouldn't fancy trying to run the country.

Bad Attitude: Mind you, for their salaries plus expenses I couldn't do any worse than them, could I? All they care about is their own power.

If you have something like this 'bad altitude problem', don't despair. There are others like you, not in hundreds or thousands, but in millions. Just think of election-time, when you get to make your own mark for democracy. In spite of all the rousing speeches, the rallies and the broadcasts, many people still don't bother to vote. They obviously think it makes no difference to their lives who is in power and who isn’t. This, we are told, is because they have a bad attitude. Perhaps so. Perhaps, too, if speeches and policy reviews don't matter to them, they should get together and find out what does. They might find out they’ve got quite a lot in common. With each other. With us. With you.

Our Definition of Socialism (video)

 

The Socialist Party Point of View

 "How do you know when politicians are lying? When you see their lips move”.

In each election, politicians beg for another chance. Each election we give it to them. And the hunger and misery in the world, the poverty, the pollution and the despair of so many, all of these get worse instead of better.

In spite of "greening" themselves politicians can do almost nothing to stop the immense destruction caused by pollution, basically because it's cheaper to pollute than to reprocess waste.

And what could they do about poverty? Abolish it? If they do that then they must also abolish the wealthy, surely, because you can't have one without the other. And what will the rich have to say about that? Can they abolish homelessness, perhaps by giving people free houses? Again, what would the rich building contractors say? Can they abolish hunger by making food very cheap? Not if they want the support of rich food producers.

Politicians know exactly how helpless they are in the face of problems which defy any attempt to control them. But they know also that to admit defeat is political suicide. Somebody else will make the same promises and get all the votes instead, as we've been seeing with the Greens. So instead they always beg us for one more last chance.

The Socialist Party has different proposals to suggest. They are not "common sense" proposals, so "pragmatic politicians" won't be interested. We think, however, that it is time to think big. The proposals we make are ambitious. Probably more so than any, you will have heard before.

Because the problems are worldwide, we think that the solutions have to be worldwide.

 First, we are going to propose that the world organises itself democratically. It is not so at the moment, because we rely on leaders. We put people into positions of power, where they can control vast fortunes and vast armies, and then we expect them to act in our interest. That's like putting children in charge of a sweetshop. We should not be surprised when they let us down. But the world is no sweetshop, it is a matter of life and death. If we cannot trust leaders, we must learn to stand on our own feet - without leaders. We are not children, however, we are treated like children. We do not have to be helpless and weak. If we decide to make our world into a democracy, we are well able to do it.

If we decide that we should not be ruled over by tyrants and masters, we are well able to do that too. If enough of us organise together, we can accomplish anything. This is just as well, because not everyone would welcome more democracy. In fact, there is a tiny minority of people who would not be at all pleased if we decided to run things ourselves. And that's because they happen to own nearly everything on this planet.

 

Imagine what life would be like if someone discovered how to stop you from breathing without their permission. That person could charge any price they liked, and you would have to pay. Just how free would you be then? Fortunately, no-one can do that to you, but consider this - can you eat without anyone's permission? If you think so, think again. You will be arrested if you try it.

You must pay the owner first - for permission. It's the same with everything else - heating, clothing, housing, travel, communications - we have to pay for permission to have these things. And what happens when they can't pay because you have nothing to sell? Then you must sell your time and your skills - you must find a job. If you can.

There's nothing wrong with owning things. We all do. But when somebody owns the food you need to live on, it's as if they are holding a gun to your head. They can make you do almost anything. The world we live in is so arranged that a small minority of people hold that power over a very large majority, simply because of what they own. And this affects everything we think, feel and do.

Rich people don't have to wait in queues. They don't have to swallow their pride, shortchange their kids at Christmas or on their birthdays, nor buy cheap clothes, or take abuse from bosses. They don't feel dread when policemen look at them, worry about being late, or avoid people’s eyes. Rich people are beautiful people with beautiful lifestyles. And what, then, does that make us? If we want a real democracy, we must face the fact that property stands in the way.

However huge a step it is, we cannot ever be free until we have abolished the ability of people to hold such terrible power over each other. Property and money are worldwide institutions. To uproot them would mean turning the world as we know it virtually upside down. We do not propose such a change lightly. The implications are so enormous that they cannot possibly be covered in a few leaflets.

We know how much is against us, and we know what the rich and powerful might try to do to stop it. Yet we believe it can be done, that it can be done quickly, and that it can be done without violence of any kind.

Welcome to Real Socialism (video)

 

Anti All Wars

 

The war in Ukraine arouses, as war often does, many deep emotions. It is an old, familiar theme for the propagandists — poor Belgium in 1914, poor  Poland in 1939 and now it is poor  Ukraine. But there is emotion on the other side as well. The war did not start out of nothing. Russia feared Western aggression. Always behind the scenes, the big power blocs are operating, supporting one side or the other with arms and military advice, with aid and loans, as part of a larger and more menacing clash of interests. Russia is clearly determined to exploit this situation, both for what it can get out of it and to cause the greatest possible embarrassment to the Western powers. Experience, and knowledge of capitalism, should have taught  working people.  The wars of capitalism are fought to settle the disputes of its ruling classes; no working-class interests are at stake in them. The problems of the Ukrainian workers are the same as those of workers all over the world, and they will not be solved in a war. Their interests are the same as those of the workers of Russia and of every other capitalist country—to unite for the overthrow of capitalism and the triumph of socialism. 

 

The cause of war today is the capitalist organisation of society, a society based on the private ownership of the means of life and on the production of goods and services to make a profit. Capitalism creates ruling groups who constantly struggle with each other for control of the wealth of the world. Governments represent the interest of these ruling groups. Their conflicts are economic ones: the competition for markets, the race for sources of raw material, and the mastery of strategic positions. Russia is no less involved in this sordid business than the U.S.A.

While it is important that workers oppose war, it is just as important that we recognise just why armed conflicts between states break out and in whose interests wars are waged. If you think about it you'll be hard-pressed to think of a single war that did not have its roots in the desire of small elites to make profits. All wars, even small-scale conflicts – and the ongoing conflict in Ukraine is no exception – tend to be fought over mineral wealth, foreign markets and areas of influence, trade routes or the strategic points from which the same can be defended.

For the Socialist Party, the war in Ukraine has no rights or wrongs except the over-riding fact that capitalist wars are not waged for the benefit of the working class or impoverished peasants. In the opening phases, the Russian armies were everywhere victorious but now Ukrainianians counter-attacked and the outcome no matter which armies had won on the battlefield will solve no working-class problem and will bring socialism no nearer. As in previous wars, the Socialist Party takes the opportunity to proclaim its abhorrence of the sordid, callous and mercenary nature of the international capitalist class and its commitment to socialism.

Having no quarrel with the working class of any country, we extend to our fellow workers of all lands the expression of our goodwill and socialist fraternity and pledge ourselves to work for the overthrow of capitalism and the triumph of socialism.

War can solve no working-class problem. It cuts across the fundamental identity of interest of the workers of the world, setting sections of this class at enmity with each other in the interests of sections of the capitalist class. 

War elevates force into the position of arbiter in place of the common human desire for mutual peace and happiness. Its effect is wholly evil. It depraves all the participants by forcing them to concentrate on the best methods of producing misery and of annihilating each other. 

War elevates lying, cheating, disabling and murdering opponents into virtues, and confers distinctions upon those who practise these means most successfully.

Men and women have the vile methods of warfare impressed upon them so thoroughly that they lose a balanced outlook on life and are impregnated with the idea that force, with all its baseness, and not reason, is the final solution in all problems. 

Socialism is completely opposed to war and to what war represents. At the same time, it is the only solution to the conditions that breed war. It is a new form of society in which the people of the world will work harmoniously together for their mutual benefit, for there will be neither privilege nor property to cause enmity. 

No coercion will be needed in socialism because each will gain from co-operating harmoniously with his fellows. But it is a new social system that demands understanding of its implications from those who seek to establish it. 

With the establishment of socialism, war will disappear and humanity will emerge.

The only way forward is a revolutionary change to a completely different society:

· Worldwide common ownership of resources— not minority class ownership.

· Production to meet human needs — not for private profit.

· Free access to goods and services — not the rationing of a monetary system.

· A free, democratically-run, non-authoritarian system giving equal opportunity for all.

 

This can only be achieved by the conscious action of the majority of the working class. We urge you to join us in the fight to establish world socialism. To end war – and the need to demonstrate against each war as one war succeeds another (were you on the demos against the war in Iraq, Afghanistan and before that against the war in Kosovo?) – capitalism has to be ended and replaced by a global system where the resources of the Earth have become the common heritage of all Earthpeople. That way, competition and conflict between elites over resources can give way to co-operation between peoples in different parts of the globe to use the world's resources for the benefit of all its inhabitants.

If you lend your support to a political party or organisation that fails to question the real nature of capitalist society, how our world is organised for production and how power is distributed, then you are in effect supporting a system that bred this war – and will breed future wars. We urge you to think seriously and reconsider your position. Capitalism and war and uncertainty that comes with it, or world socialism and global peace and security? Protest endlessly against each new war as it arises or campaign for a new world of common ownership, democratic control, peace and human welfare.

Chomsky - Alternative to Capitalism (video)

 

Working for Socialism

 

WAGE SLAVERY

Today there is no socialism anywhere. Nowhere is there full freedom of expression.

We in The Socialist Party aim at building a world community — without frontiers, based on the common ownership and democratic control of the means of production where things will be produced for use. A world without war, world hunger or racialism. A world that has no need of money and has abolished rent, interest, profits, wages and prices. A world fit for human beings in which the way of life would be:

From each according to ability,
       to each according to needs

We think such a society can be brought into being only when it is technically possible for abundance to be produced (as it is now) and when a majority of the population understands the implications of such a socialist reorganisation, desire it and take the necessary democratic action to establish it

We insist that any attempt to make such a revolutionary change, except by organised democratic political action will never succeed. We are opposed to the efforts of anarchists, Leninists, Trotskyists, Maoists and other elitist groups which set out to disrupt the democratic process or to seize power following deliberate provocative actions aimed at manipulating masses of students and workers in the interests of the self-appointed ‘revolutionary' vanguards. Fortunately, although they do not share our revolutionary socialist view, most students and workers have sufficient political insight to reject the roles intended for them by these would-be leaders.

The Socialist Party says that this society can, and should, be changed. The means for producing wealth should belong to the whole community since this is the only arrangement that will allow them to be used to satisfy human needs. Production solely for use (without buying and selling) is only possible, given modern technology, on the basis of this common ownership and democratic control. Modern technology can provide plenty for all that will allow mankind to organise the production and distribution of wealth on the principle of: from each according to ability, to each according to need.

The Socialist Party is not preaching brotherly love as the solution to social problems (that is the doctrine of Christianity, one of the great props of class society throughout the ages). We advocate a change in the basis of society, a social revolution. One of the distinguishing features of homo sapiens is the ability to think abstractly, and to plan their actions without reference to their immediate circumstances. Insofar as man has instincts these are merely biological needs like food, drink and sex. But this tells us nothing about how these needs are met. That is a question of social organisation. But since human biology has hardly changed in millions of years while human society has, it is no good trying to try to explain society and social change by biology. Human nature (whatever it might be) is no barrier to socialism. Indeed socialism is, in the present circumstances, the only rational way to run society. For, with common ownership and production for use, man is in charge of his social environment and not, as under capitalism, at the mercy of economic forces.

What's the incentive to work in socialism? Many people’s attitude to work is shaped by capitalist values. They have automatically assumed that work must be unpleasant and that therefore people must have some monetary incentive to work. Work is merely the expenditure of energy. For human beings it is both a biological and a social necessity. Human beings must somehow use up the energy that eating food generates, and if no wealth is produced society will die out. So the real question is: How is work organised? Under what conditions is it done? Under capitalism, most work is employment, done in the service of other human beings. It is done under discipline, rather than as free cooperation. It is often dull, even dangerous and degrading. And, as a class society always “respects” those on top (who don't have to work), there is a stigma attached to working. It is a sign of social inferiority to have to work. The Socialist Party says that work can, and should, be made pleasant. Indeed, one of our strongest points against capitalism is that it forces most people to do boring work. But men and women can only control their working environment when they also control the means and instruments of work.

Freedom River (video)