Capitalism - Each Against All

 

A few can rise out of their class and become traitors and renegades to their own working people; the mass is going to remain where they are. They can rise when the whole class rises together, to real social power. That’s why Eugene Debs said: “I want to rise with my class, not out of it.”

We are a class-stratified society and are getting more so. And no amount of media talk can disguise this fact. The most fundamental social fact is that the people are divided into classes, and the walls between the classes, instead of growing less, are getting higher. Class barriers are increasing. The picture is becoming clearer and clearer: on the one side, Big Business, property and its CEOs; and, on the other side, labour.

When they talk to you about “unlimited opportunity” for “social mobility” but working people live out their lives on the level at which they happen to be born and that is the bone and gristle of the capitalist class system. It is hard to find the media that tells the truth about capitalism, its exploitation and oppression of the people.

The voice of socialism is clear and distinctive and beyond the reach of effective argument because it speaks always and everywhere for this powerful idea: Without the fight for economic democracy, and without the fight for socialism, there can be no social progress. The question of our times grows clearer: the struggle for socialism or world destruction.

Economic power is political power. Don’t let anybody fool you otherwise. Economic power is direct political power. And the bigger industry gets, the more integrated its technology, and the more interdependent its parts, the more dependent the whole society and its government becomes upon those who own and control that technology. What this means is that, with the growth of big industries and monopolies, corporate share in total power has grown enormously.

Socialism will eliminate exploitation. It will rid the world of inequality, competition, social robbery and the nationalism and imperialism that gives rise to global war. In the absence of world socialism, a planet of human harmony, science and technology is now capable of destroying all mankind. Socialism has now moved from the realm of the possible or probable into the realm of necessity in order to save life itself.

 What better plan has anyone offered anywhere for the ending of capitalist anarchy than the socialist reconstruction of society? Is there any plan that goes to the root of the evil as does that to make the means of production the property of the working people, controlled by them, for the production of the things the world needs, ending the limits set by money and markets?

 

What Socialism Can Bring

 

We know that the cause of the oppression of the working class and of all the atrocities of capitalism such as war is that the world has been enslaved by a few capitalists who own all the wealth of the earth as their private property. The capitalist ownership of the means of production – this is the reason which explains the barbarity of the present order of things. 

Some reformers propose depriving the rich of their possessions and justly and equally dividing it all among everybody, and then all will be well. They say everyone would be equal, and free from inequality, oppression and exploitation, thanks to this equal share-out and everybody will look after themselves and the domination over another will vanish.

But this is not the point of view of the Socialist Party. The Socialist Party considers that such equal sharing would lead to nothing good, and to no other result than a return to the old order. Firstly, there are quite a number of things which are impossible to divide. How, for instance, would you divide ta rail network?

But for argument’s sake let us imagine that miraculously a more or less equal division was attained of everything taken from the rich; even that would not lead to any desired result in the end. What is the meaning of a division? It means that instead of a few large owners there would spring up a large number of small ones. It means not the abolition of private ownership, but its dispersion over a larger area. In the place of large ownership, there would arise ownership on a small scale. But such a period we have already had in the past. We know very well that capitalism and large capitalists have developed out of the competition between one small owner and another. We would get the following result: part of them (and quite a considerable part) would, on the very next day, get rid of their share on some market or other, and their property would thus fall into the hands of wealthier owners; between the remaining ones a struggle would ensue for the buyers, and in this struggle, too, the wealthier ones would soon get the upper hand of the less well-to-do. The latter would soon be ruined and turn into wage-labourers, and their lucky rivals would amass fortunes, employing others to work for them, and thus be gradually transformed into capitalists. And so we should, in a very short time, return to the same order which we have just tried to dismantle and find ourselves once again before the old problem of capitalist exploitation.

In socialism, all the wealth belongs not to individuals or classes, but to society as a whole, which become it were, one great association; no one a master over another. Individuals in socialism do not benefit at one another’s expense. There are no rich here, no bosses and no top dogs; society is not divided into classes in which one rules over the other, no oppressor against the oppressed. There is no government to rule and there is no power of one over another. There is the administration of things only. Humanity is not divided up into hostile camps. The political barriers that divide nations are done away with. Separate fatherlands and rival motherlands are abolished. The whole of humanity, without distinction of nationality, is bound together in. all its parts and organised into one united whole. All peoples form one great world cooperative commonwealth.

The essential characteristics of socialism are:

1. Common ownership of the means of production and distribution of wealth. The elimination of the right of individuals or groups to dispose of the means of life. That right belongs to society as a whole. Hence, no exploitation of one group by another.
 

2. Economic and social planning on a world scale: This is made possible by the abolition of competition between capitalists, the anarchy of production, wars and militarism.
 

3. Production for use, not for profit: Substitution of the good for the commodity.
 

4. The abolition of the state: with socialism the state is unnecessary. Government in the form of armies, police, prisons, and property laws gives way to a system of administration, allocation, management and supervision of industry and agriculture by all the people, such as is necessary to maintain the world economy in smooth running order.
 

5. Disappearance of artificial differences and barriers fostered by capitalism: Nationalism, race hatred, religious bigotry, and caste are destroyed by international production and cooperation.
 

6. A tremendous increase in the productive capabilities of the human race: Human energy now necessarily spent in the class struggle or destroyed by war, unemployment and unproductive pursuits such as competition, advertising, warfare etc., will be set free. Increased productivity means a shorter work day, security and increased leisure. Society can then take from the individual according to their abilities and give to them according to their needs. The higher form of human organisation that existed in primitive societies with low productivity now is recreated on the highest level of productivity. On this foundation culture – the arts and sciences – can rise to undreamed heights.
 

Defeat nationalism

 

We live in an age of possible social revolution – the rise of world socialism and the overthrow of world capitalism. There is no middle way between the capitalist system and socialism.

Nationalism is an outlook that preaches to the people of a nation or national group that regardless of class they have more in common with one another than they do with the people of other nations. Nationalism helps bind the working class to the bourgeoisie of its nation.  World socialism unites the working people of the world against their masters. That is why capitalists promote nationalism and oppose socialist internationalism. Working people’s destiny must not be tied to the capitalists, nor to the aspiring national bourgeoisie of an oppressed nation. The working class must have its own ideology and rid itself of the ideology of its class enemy. To the extent that the working class holds nationalist ideas, it is allowing its destiny to be determined by its rulers. Marxists do not differentiate between oppressed and oppressor nations in order to proclaim that the nationalism of the oppressor is reactionary while that of the oppressed is progressive. Marxists do not fan the flames of nationalism that further divisions within the working class.

A national ruling class fosters the national liberation struggle for its own narrow class interests. It raises its banner of nationalism – “Palestine for the Palestinians,” for example. The nationalist banner appears to have anti-imperialist content. It enlists the working class in the national liberation struggle. It even directs fire at the imperialists. But the key question is: What are its class aims? The ruling class aims not at destroying capitalism, but at getting a bigger slice of the exploitation pie. Nationalism serves the bourgeoisie in the sense that they are seeking a market for their goods, and their national market is always primary as capitalism develops. And nationalism serves to help the bourgeoisie secure its national market. That is why it always ends up selling out to the imperialists or substituting one imperialist for another. The working class has no interest in choosing one imperialist for another; nor do workers seek to have their own bourgeoisie exploit them. They cannot put aside the socialist aims of the revolution for the sake of unity with the national bourgeoisie.  Nationalists will betray the people at every turn.

Marxists are internationalists. And even if they are Marxists of an oppressed nationality, they seek to join with workers of other nationalities in smashing their oppression and all oppression and exploitation even with workers of the oppressor country. National oppression cannot be ended until the elimination of class exploitation and their own national oppression is just one particular aspect of the outrages of capitalism. It is nationalism that divides the workers so that the workers of one nationality are struggling against the workers of another nationality for a few illusory crumbs the rulers throw out exactly for that purpose! It is nationalism that can pit groups of workers against each other with the most hideous rage, while their mutual oppressors skip off with both their purses for a little fun in the sun.  Any nationalism ultimately implies that those people are better than all others. Zionism should teach us at this moment more forcibly than anything else, how even the most “justifiable” nationalism, taken to its logical conclusion, can end up justifying the oppression of the Palestinians.

Tolstoy explained, “Nationalism is the site of execution. What it practices is the art of killing; what it discusses is the ways of killing. It has nothing to do with the real life of the masses.”

 It is the essence of “nationalism.”

Except for cold-blooded psychopaths and sadistic politicians, all human beings hate war. The origin of war is often found in the “love for one’s nation.” As nationalism” emerged, whose cause and purpose were all about selfishness and greed, for example, when one state wants to expand its territory, it will sacrifice its people to invade other nations. If it wins, only the rulers can enjoy the fruit of success. If it is defeated, working people suffer. Does it benefit the masses?

 The interests of the capitalist and the worker are irreconcilable, just as the international interests of the working class are irreconcilable with defence of the national interests of its country. ‘The workingmen have no country’ means:

(a) his/her economic position is not national but international;

(b) his/her class enemy is international;

(c) the conditions of his/her emancipation also;

(d) the international unity of the workers is more important than the national.

Against nationalism, socialists have always countered with the slogan: the enemy is here at home. Workers should oppose their own rulers who oppressed other nations. Class war is our battlecry, and the international solidarity of labour is our goal. We protest against every form of nationalism. The fight for Marxism is a fight against nationalism of any kind whatsoever.

Working People's Interests

 Many on the political ‘left’ will argue that Palestinian nationalism is somehow progressive and different to Israeli nationalism and should therefore be supported. As socialists, we say that this is a dangerous poison that is being spread by the left and that no side engaged in such conflict can either speak for the working class as a whole or be an example to it.

History is replete with minorities in existing states using terrorist methods so that a new state may be formed or territory transferred from the “ownership” of one state to another. The working class of wage and salary earners is never in a position to benefit from this process; it is only in a position to suffer. The working class – by definition the class that does not possess any significant titles to land or private property, including capital – has quite literally nothing to gain from a situation where one group of rulers and owners is replaced by another group.

In the 19th century, when the modern capitalist system was expanding across the globe, “national liberation” struggles, typically led by a local growing capitalist class against the old autocratic empires, were part of the process which swept away the old political arrangements and opened the way forward for liberal democracy and the development of capitalist methods of production. It was often argued that it was in the interests of the working class during this time to take the side of the capitalists against the old autocracies like the Ottoman Empire and the Russian Empire, etc. It was said that this process would open the way up for working class organisation and for the development of an advanced industrial system which is a prerequisite for a socialist society of abundance and free access to available wealth.

Since then, the capitalist system has become a world system. The alleged justification for the working class taking sides in 'national liberation' struggles has now gone if ever it existed and today all such struggles are just deadly battles between sections of the capitalist class, even though it is the workers – imbued with nationalist poison – that naturally enough end up doing the fighting and dying.

The goal of the World Socialist Movement is not to assist in the creation of even more states and more nationalities, but to establish a real world community without frontiers where all states as they currently exist will be destroyed. In a socialist society, communities, towns and cities will have the opportunity to thrive – and people will no doubt feel an attachment to places that are real and tangible – but the 'imagined communities' that are nation-states will be consigned to the history books where they belong.

The ‘national interest’ is an all time favourite phrase bandied about by all manner of patriots in any crisis. But what is it supposed to mean?

The national interest conjures up an image that we are all one big happy family, all pulling and working together for the good of all; that we all have something to be proud of, to defend and to benefit from. It suggests an absence of strife and antagonism and that the real enemy is 'out there'. We're meant to feel good about the national interest, secure in the knowledge that the well-informed are thinking on our behalf.  National interest is the paternalistic jargon of a profit-hungry elite, trying to rationalise in our eyes the lengths they will go to accrue more profits at our expense. It is used by politicians largely to secure support for a course of action they are finding difficult to promote. It is designed to block serious discussion of an issue - who'll argue against the national interest and risk being denounced as unpatriotic? – and to marginalise opponents, thus stifling a deeper understanding of issues. The interests of the majority - of the working class - are diametrically opposed to the interests of the master, or capitalist, class. True, we all have basic needs and desires, whichever class we belong to, but talking about shared interests in a two-class society is nonsense. The capitalist class have one real interest - and let them deny it - to maximise their investment and to accrue more profit at our expense. How many people get hurt and trod on or slaughtered in the process is of no consequence. Anything is legitimate in the pursuit of profit. 

 We, the working class, on the other hand, own little more than our ability to labour by brain or by hand - an ability we sell to the master class. Our interest under capitalism becomes getting the best price for our labour. Indeed such is the onus on us to sell our labour power at as high a price as possible that its consequences dominate every aspect of our lives.

It has to be remembered that the master class depend on our complacency for their continued survival. Our silence, our willingness to accept everything they say without question, is the victory they celebrate every day.

Our job should therefore be to doubt and question everything they say - if we stand for nothing we fall for anything. For we do have interests. As a globally exploited class, denied so many of the benefits of civilisation in a world of abundance, it is in our interests, our real class interests, to help put a stop to their insane system, not just for the future of humanity, but for the future of our planet.

Our real class interests lie in establishing a global system of society, devoid of borders or frontiers, social classes or leaders, state governments, force or coercion, money, wages or salaries, a world in which production is freed from the artificial constraints of profit and used to its fullest potential and for the benefit of all. These interests are far removed from the national interest we are supposed to identify and moreover, they benefit all of today's classes.

Don't live in a political vacuum

 We have every reason to be fearful for the future of humanity. The war in Ukraine could easily escalate into a nuclear exchange. The environmental crisis could lead to irreversible tipping points. The possibility of another virus pandemic is always present.  Many countries are in the throes of economic meltdowns.  Capitalism cannot be trusted to run the world in the interests of humanity and governments serve the interests of profit first. No reform, nor attempt to improve the system, can do more than ameliorate its inconsistencies and contradictions. There can be no democracy in a complex system designed to justify inequality, a system in which the power of money carries the right to govern, in which the governed accept their own inferiority, lack of self-respect and sense of worth, a system in which crime, conflict, nationalism, racism, ethnic cleansing is inevitable.

Money has enabled the human species to develop the technology with which it dominates the earth, but it has become an excuse for ignoring the factors that impede its own social advance. Money has made work a bad name, with connotations of long hours, stress, tiredness, and monotonous, yet, even in this acquisitive society of ours, most of us do some sort of voluntary work, helping others is enjoyable provided that we do not feel that it is augmenting other people’s interests at our expense. In a money-free world, people's power available would be virtually limitless. There would be plenty for them to d our fellows, our environment, our towns and cities, our talents and potentialities. There would be enough to keep us occupied for generations. We assume that without money there would be anarchy, but it is the chaotic complexity of the money system and the governments required to maintain it that is anarchic.

The greatest benefit of all would be in the reduction or elimination of the anti-social emotions of greed, hatred, selfishness and aggression, which the money system makes inevitable and we would be able to treat ourselves and each other as the sort of human beings that we claim to be.

 Suppose we are ever to take control of this planet and run it in the real interests of its inhabitants. In that case, we must do so ourselves, without leaders and with a view to establishing a global system of society in which production is freed from the constraints of profit and in which each person will have free access to the benefits of civilisation.

 

The Socialist Party is in favour of democracy, and socialism will be a fully democratic society, but full democracy is not possible under capitalism. Supporters of capitalism who talk about "democracy" always mean only political democracy since economic democracy - where people would democratically run the places where they work - is out of the question under capitalism, based as it is on these workplaces being owned and controlled by and for the benefit of a privileged minority.

You can have the most democratic constitution imaginable but this won't make any difference to the fact that profits have to come before meeting needs under capitalism. The people's will to have their needs appropriately met is constantly frustrated by the economic laws of the capitalist system, which no political structure, however democratic, can control.

It is not imperfections in the political decision-making process that are the problem but the profit system and its economic laws. And the answer is not the democratic reform of capitalism's political structure but the replacement of capitalism with socialism.

As a society based on common instead of class ownership of the means of production, socialism will fulfil the first condition for genuine democracy. Because it will be a class-free society without a privileged wealthy class, everyone can have a genuinely equal say in the way things are run. A few will not be more equal than others, as they are under capitalism, because they own more wealth.

 Socialism will be a society where the laws of profit no longer operate since common ownership and democratic control will allow people to produce to meet their needs instead of for the profit of a few as today.

Think Local or Think Global?

 

If we want to improve things we are going to have to act for ourselves. We're going to have to organise democratically to bring about a society geared to meeting human needs, not profits. But production for use (not profit) is only possible on the basis of genuine common ownership and democratic co-operation - what we call socialism.

This kind of society may seem like a million miles away, but remember we already have the resources and technology to make it possible! After all, this is a world of plenty. What prevents us from enjoying it is class division. Under capitalism, only a tiny minority of the world has ownership and control over the economy. The vast majority of us have nothing except our ability to work which we are then obliged to sell to the minority. 

WE are the ones who create all wealth in society - but then we hand it over to the minority, the capitalist class!

One World. One People

We have a world to win. The Socialist Party cannot bring this about on your behalf, and we're not promising to. As workers ourselves all we promise is to play our part in bringing about a sane and rational democratic society where we collectively make the decisions that affect us without needing to worry about how to pay. A society where meeting our needs is the only priority!.

The Socialist Party

What happens locally depends mainly on what happens in the country and even in the world. That is why socialists are working for a different world. But it can't happen unless you join us. The job of making a better world must be the work of all of us.

Since 1904 The Socialist Party has completely opposed the idea of leadership; has rejected all forms of nationalism and advocated a world without borders; and has opposed both the phoney 'socialism' of the Labour Party and the state-capitalist dictatorship of the Soviet Union.

The world we want is one where we all work together. Co-operation is in our interests and this is how a socialist community would be organised - through democracy and through working with each other.

To co-operate we need democratic control not only in our own area, but by people everywhere. This means that all places of industry and manufacture, all the land, transport, shops etc. should be owned in common by the whole community. That way we could all enjoy free access to what we need without the barriers of buying and selling.

FOR A WORLD OF GENUINE COMMON OWNERSHIP AND FREE ACCESS!

An End To Pessimism

We, in the Socialist Party, reject the view that things will always stay the same. We CAN change the world. Nothing could stop a majority of socialists building a new society run for the benefit of everyone. We all have the ability to work together in each other's interests.

All it takes is the right ideas and a willingness to make it happen.

Politicians are fond of telling us that we must take responsibility for our own lives and that we must see to it that our world is a fit place for our children to grow up in. I’ll not disagree with that, but what I will ask is how can we seriously do anything about it when the real decisions are not in our hands? Because of the way things are organised at present, none of us are allowed to take part in the really important decisions that affect us – the ones about our schools, about health and housing, peace and pollution and the distribution of wealth. We are no more consulted on the closure of schools or the selling of council properties to private landlords than we were consulted on the decision to invade another country.

What the Socialist Party suggests as the alternative to this insane set up is a truly democratic society in which every person has a free and democratic say in the decisions that affect them – a society without leaders and the led.

In such a society, people would co-operate to run all of the world’s natural and industrial resources in their own interests, freeing production from the artificial constraints of profit and establishing a system of society in which each person has free access to the benefits of civilisation.

Today we have the technology, the resources and the know-how to satisfy everyone’s needs. That fact is well established. However, we cannot utilise society’s assets sensibly because of the profit-driven requirements of the market-system.

In a society in which the fundamental need of production is profit, our needs come a poor second. The profit system exerts such an influence in society that it impinges upon every aspect of our lives, and you’d be hard pressed to think of some service or product that is not balanced against cost – something to muse on whilst waiting for the bus, the police or visiting the local shops.

You may consider that the society outlined sounds nice, but that socialists are demanding the impossible. All we are asking is that you think for yourselves, value yourself and your fellows higher; expect more for your children and grandchildren. Is it not the case that our world would be a better place to live in if we each had a real democratic say in the decision-making process and real control over the means and instruments for producing and distributing the things we need to live in comfort? Is it not high time that we took back control of our destiny from the profit mongers and their lackeys in power?

Voting for socialism is a step in the right direction and at last puts the ‘real issue’ on the political agenda.

At the end of the day it is up to you as a member of the waged class. It is up to you to decide whether you favour the present system or the rationally organised system we call socialism.

If you agree, if you think we are each capable of cooperating to run a society of free access in our own interests – but only if you agree – then vote for socialism and yourself.