Monaco Madness

The  small city state of Monaco has been attracting the fabulously wealthy for decades. 'But now Monaco could become quite literally the playground of the rich and famous after developers announced the arrival of a five-floor penthouse with giant infinity pool and its own slide overlooking the sea.  The luxury flat at the top of a new skyscraper could set its new owner back more than 300 million euros (£240,000,000) making it the world's most expensive penthouse.' (Daily Telegraph, 19 August) This obscene display of riches shows the arrogance and contempt the owning class feel towards the working class. RD

Campaign for Socialism

"While theologians are disputing the existence of a hell elsewhere, we are on the way to realizing it here: and if capitalism is to endure, whatever may become of men when they die, they will come into hell when they are born." - William Morris

Only socialism can solve the major social and economic problems plaguing our society today. But many people have been taught all their lives that "socialism" means the state-controlled system that existed in the Soviet Union, exists today in China or Cuba.

Socialism is the common ownership by all the people of the factories, mills, mines, railroads, land and all other instruments of production. Socialism means production to satisfy human needs, not, as under capitalism, for sale and profit. Socialism means direct control and management of the industries and social services by the workers through a democratic worldwide economic organisation. Such a system would make possible the fullest democracy and freedom. It would be a society based on the most primary freedom, economic freedom. For individuals, socialism means an end to economic insecurity and exploitation. It means workers cease to be commodities bought and sold on the labour market and forced to work as appendages to tools owned by someone else. It means a chance to develop all individual capacities and potentials within a free community of free individuals. Socialism does not mean government or state ownership. It does not mean a state bureaucracy with the working class oppressed by a new management class. Far from being a bureaucratically controlled system, socialism would bring democracy -- the rule of the people -- to the most vital part of our lives, the economy. It does not mean a closed party-run system without democratic rights. It does not mean nationalisation, or state capitalism of any kind. It means a complete end to all capitalist social relations.  Socialism gives power not to the state, but to the people themselves, allowing collective control of their own economic future. Far from being a state-controlled society, socialism would be a society WITHOUT A STATE. Marx once said that "the existence of the state is inseparable from the existence of slavery."

Socialism means a classless society. Unlike under capitalism, where a tiny minority owns the vast majority of wealth and the means of producing it, everyone would share equally in the ownership of all the means of production, and everyone able to do so would work. There wouldn't be separate classes of owners and workers. The economy would be administered by the workers themselves through industrially based, democratic "associations of free and equal producers," as Marx described it. The community collectively would decide what they want produced and how they want it produced. The Socialist Party doesn't call on the workers to take over this or that individual plant; it calls on them to take over the entire economy, which is to say, ALL the factories, mills, mines, railroads, retail outlet stores, warehouses, etc.

 In a socialist society, we shall produce everything we need and want in abundance under conditions best suited to our welfare, aiming for the highest quality. We shall constantly strive to improve our methods and equipment in order to reduce the hours of work. We shall provide ourselves with the best of everything: the finest educational facilities, the most modern and scientific health facilities and adequate and varied recreational facilities. We shall constantly seek to improve our socialist society. Purposeful research, expansion of the arts and culture, preservation and replacement of our natural resources, all will receive the most serious attention. It will be a society in which everyone will have the fullest opportunity to develop his or her individuality without sacrificing the blessings of cooperation. Freed from the compulsions of competition and the profit motive that presently hurl capitalist nations into war, socialism will also be a society of peace.

This all may sound too good to be true. Yet the world has the productive capacity to provide a high standard of living for all, to provide security and comfort for all, to create safe workplaces and clean industries. The only thing keeping us from reaching these goals is that the workers don't own and control that productive capacity; it is owned and controlled by a few who use it solely to profit themselves. In short, socialist society will be a society of secure human beings, living in peace, in harmony and human brotherhood.

Organising to bring the industries under the ownership of all the people, to build a socialist society of peace, plenty and freedom, is the only real alternative workers have. A capitalist future of profound social dislocation and human misery is an absolute certainty because of the economic laws on which capitalism is based -- laws which compel every capitalist concern to strive for the greatest possible profit at the lowest possible cost. To put it another way: Unless the working class becomes conscious of what a capitalist future holds the time may well come when it will be reduced to the beggar’s condition.

The goal of the Socialist Party is to replace capitalism with the economic and social democracy of socialism,  a society in which the means of social production are owned socially and administered democratically by the workers themselves through their own organisations. The chaos and increasing oppression that exists in capitalism today make it clear that socialist revolution is past due. Many of us realise that capitalism has outlived its usefulness, and that it is time for humanity to move on to the next stage in social evolution. We want to create a sane and productive world. The working class is paying a heavy toll in human misery and suffering, which will become more intense unless our class organises its political and economic strength and uses it to establish the socialist alternative. It is the responsibility of all those who grasp the Socialist Party's message to step forward, to join our party and to enhance its ability to reach the working class. When the Socialist Party has enough members and activists to reach large numbers of workers, it will offer candidates for the working class to elect to-- BUT NOT TO RUN THE CAPITALIST GOVERNMENT OF TODAY-- but to dissolve the current government that only serves to preserve the capitalists' hold over the rest of society. If we workers stopped cooperating with the political parties of capitalism and actively took part in controlling our world through our own political organisations, capitalism would soon come to an end. We don't have to turn our backs on politics or passively wait for better days.  We don't have to wander around in search of direction. We don't have to suffer in isolation. We can join together and we can change our world in a manner that is peaceful,workable and within the grasp of working people.

The Socialist Party does not advocate violence. However, neither does it advocate pacifism. What the SPGB advocates is socialism. How to achieve it is the problem. That problem is one of tactics, and tactics depend on the social conditions and atmosphere that exist at the appropriate time and place. Our attitude towards Parliament we believe offers the best -- indeed the only realistic -- chance to achieve socialism by non-violent and peaceful means. We believe it is the only way in which the working class can organise itself for socialism while simultaneously nullifying the ruling class's capacity to resist by means of armed force. We fully understand that this policy can only work under certain circumstances. It presupposes a certain measure of democracy that permits the Socialist Party to advocate its goal openly.

Who Owns the North Pole (part 73)

Russia aims to develop the Arctic as a region of peace and international cooperation, but will always defend its national interests said Security Council Secretary Nikolay Patrushev. The Security Council is Russia’s top consultative body on strategic issues of national importance.

“While Russia is planning to defend firmly its geopolitical and economic interests in the Arctic zone, we also seek to strengthen the cooperation with other member countries of the Arctic Council and to turn the Arctic region into a zone of peace, stability and cooperation,” the message read. 

In April this year Putin announced that Russia was creating a new united fleet of new generation combat ships and submarines permanently deployed to the Arctic. Russia has intensified the development of its Arctic Regions over the past few years, including works on the Northern Sea Route, which is gradually becoming an alternative to traditional transport corridors between Europe and Asia.

Poor Scots

Nearly one million Scots cannot afford adequate housing, a new study claims. More than 250,000 people aren't properly fed, according to the Poverty and Social Exclusion (PSE) project. 800,000 people are too poor to engage in common social activities.

The percentage of households falling below society's minimum standard of living has also increased from 14% to 33% over the last 30 years. 18% of children and adults in Scotland were poor at the end of 2012.

1. Over 400,000 adults go without essential clothing
2. More than 200,000 children live in homes that are damp
3. Nearly one in three people (30%) cannot afford to heat their homes adequately in winter
4. About 350,000 children live in cold homes in winter
5. 50,000 children live in households that cannot afford to heat their home
6. Nearly one in four adults has an income below what they consider is needed to avoid poverty
7. One in every eight (13%) adults in paid work is poor
8.One in five adults has had to borrow in the last year to pay for day-to-day needs.

Prof Nick Bailey, from the University of Glasgow, claimed the study proved Westminster and Scottish government attempts to tackle poverty had failed.

Prof Glen Bramley, from Heriot-Watt University, added: "It is worrying that, in the 21st Century, more than 40% of households who want to use meals on wheels, evening classes, museums, youth clubs, citizens' advice or special transport cannot do so due to unavailability, unaffordability or inadequacy."

Overthrow the System

“From each according to ability: to each according to needs” is our  goal, and we must understand that it can only be reached through struggle against those who are interested in protecting the status quo, because it gives them power and privilege at the cost of other people’s labour and poverty.

 Socialism will mean an end to the exploitation of man by man. It will bring freedom to all those oppressed by capital and open up a new period of history for people. The ending of the exploitation, the cruelty and injustice caused by class society in its various forms, has long been the dream of mankind. It found expression in men like John Ball, Robert Owen, the Chartists and many of the pioneers of the British labour movement.

 Under capitalism the workers are wage slaves, slaves of the employers. Socialism counts among the world’s workers all those who labour with hand or brain in the production of life’s necessities and luxuries. The bosses run the factories in order to maximize profits. This means that they pay workers as little as possible, that they do not hesitate to maintain unsafe working conditions to save costs, and that poor quality products are purposely produced in order to increase profits. History has shown that these conditions are always present under capitalism, and cannot be eliminated as long as there is capitalism. A capitalist has to exploit his workers in order to survive as a capitalist. The government must necessarily be run by and for the capitalists. Each ruling class maintains its power through an apparatus known as the state. While there is class society, the state will continue to exist and exercise its control over society which enable it to impregnate elements of all classes with the ideas which legitimises its power.

The world could be a paradise. Why it is not is because of the way society is organised, the system of society which prevails. Some of the main features of this society are. It is divided into rich and poor—a tiny handful of rich  who do not need to work, and the overwhelming majority who do require to work their whole lives through. This tiny handful of people own the means of production. But they do not work them. The immense majority of the people own nothing (in the sense that they can live on what they own) but their power to work. Capitalism is a system in which the means for producing wealth are owned by a few who live by exploiting the workers, i.e. by robbing them of the values they produce over and above the value of their wages.

By exploitation we mean living off the labour of other people. There have been previous forms of exploitation. In slave society, the slave-owners lived off the labour of the slaves who were their property. In feudal society, the feudal lords lived off the forced labour of the serfs. In capitalist society the worker is neither a slave nor yet a serf, i.e. forced to do free, unpaid labour for a master. But he is exploited just the same, even though the form of this exploitation is not so open and clear as was the case with the slaves and the serfs. The essence of exploitation under capitalism consists in this — that the workers, when set to work with raw materials and machinery, produce far more in values than what is paid out by the capitalists in wages. In short, they produce a surplus which is taken by the capitalists and for which they are not paid. Thus they are robbed of the values they produce. This is the source of capitalist profit. It is on this surplus, produced by the workers, that the capitalist lives in riches and luxury. The capitalists are united in their battle against the workers, despite internal differences regarding strategy and tactics. They have their goal clearly in mind -- the pursuit of ever-greater profits through the continued and ever-intensified exploitation of the workers.

The attitude of the Socialist Party is clear and definite. It claims that the wealth of society is created by the workers. It claims that the workers must own and control all the processes of wealth production. We carry this struggle on to the political field in order to challenge the power which the present ruling class wields through its domination of the State which it wins at the ballot box. By its victory at the ballot box, and its consequent political domination, the capitalists are able to enslave the working class.

As we have said, capitalism is a system in which there are exploiters and exploited, rich and poor. The interests of these two classes are clearly opposed. The exploiters try to increase the exploitation of the workers as much as possible in order to increase their profits. The exploited try to limit this exploitation, and to get back as much of the wealth as possible of which they have been robbed. This is one aspect of the class struggle which arises inevitably out of the whole character of capitalism as a class system based on exploitation. But for a lasting solution of all these problems, it is necessary to end capitalism altogether and to replace it by a new system of society in which the working people rule.

All workers realise the capitalist system fails to supply the needs of the vast majority and that it must be overthrown before the workers can have freedom. But there is considerable difference of opinions as to the means by which this can be accomplished. The Socialist Party advocates using the ballot, or parliamentary action; some others agitate for armed insurrection, and others still suggest industrial action, such as a general strike. Capitalism means production is carried on for profit. This necessitates control of industry by capitalists. The state is only an effect of capitalism. Overthrow of the state would only mean a political revolution which could be of no lasting benefit to the workers. Overthrow of capitalism would mean a social revolution, a complete change in the methods by which production and distribution are carried on. It would mean production for use instead of for profit. This can only be accomplished by the workers taking control of industry out of the hands of capitalists and running it for themselves.

The Socialist Party of Great Britain stand for a democratic and revolutionary vision of real socialism.

We’re fighting the Hun at home

“Your King and Country Need You,
Ye hardy sons of toil.
But will your King and Country need you
When they’re sharing out the spoil?”

When war was declared in 1914, union leaders more or less declared to their members “You must now cease fighting the class war and defend your country.” which had the result of some workers turning away from their union officials.

More

Getting Away With It

Britain's top executives are now paid 143 times the wages of an average employee, according to a study. Executive salaries have increased dramatically in relation to most workers, said the High Pay Centre. 'The think tank has called on the Government to act after it found that in 1998 the average chief executive of a FTSE 100 was paid 47 times the pay of their average employee. The centre's director Deborah Hargreaves said: "Britain's executives have not got so much better over the past two decades. The only reason why their pay has increased so rapidly compared to their employees is that they are able to get away with it".' (Daily Express, 18 August) So much for the notion that there is some sort of morality behind the jungle warfare of the wages and profit system. RD

Flaunting Their Wealth

With rooms costing up to £5,300 a night, they are not the sort of hotels where you'd expect to find many Ford Fiestas in the guests' car park. Vehicles parked outside the five-star Dorchester and Wellesley hotels in Mayfair, central London included Lamborghini, Ferrari, Rolls-Royce, BMW, Mercedes-Benz and Bentley. The specific cars models on display included a green 217mph Lamborghini Aventador worth £295,000 and a blue 202mph Ferrari 458 worth £200,000. 'The Dorchester's most expensive room per night is the £5,315 Harlequin suite, while the top one at The Wellesley is the £895 Hyde Park View Suite.' (Daily Mail, 18 August) This ostentatious display of wealth is occurring at the same time as millions of workers are concerned about mortgage payments, rent arrears and bedroom taxes. RD

We’re fighting the Hun at home

“Your King and Country Need You,
Ye hardy sons of toil.
But will your King and Country need you
When they’re sharing out the spoil?”

When war was declared in 1914, union leaders more or less declared to their members “You must now cease fighting the class war and defend your country.” which had the result of some workers turning away from their union officials.

The Engineers had a pre-war demand for an increase in wages of 2d an hour based on the increase in the cost of living during the three year period of frozen wages and the outbreak of war gave the employers ample excuses for refusing to meet the demand. It was also clear that the employers had a valuable asset in the arbitrary powers of the Government, and that they intended to make full use of them. As a result,  the trade union leaders were coerced into signing agreements which bound the men hand and foot, and made “official” action impossible. Alternative means were sought and the shop steward movement grew.

 In February 1915, the Engineers union officials accepted a derisory 3/4 a penny rise in the hourly rate. Deserted by their own officials, the local shop stewards formed a strike committee which couldn’t be called such because strikes had already been declared illegal in the war for democracy so instead they was called themselves a “Labour Withholding Committee.”

The initial dispute overcame coercion and intimidation brought to bear against them, and despite an the equally desolatory compromise of 1d. per hour rise gained, they had demonstrated  their discipline and capacity for organisation, returning to work in a body still united. There had been  no strike pay or support from the national union, but the workers has been 100 per cent and went back unbroken after two weeks. It was decided to continue the strike as a go-slow and work-to-rule. They carried their grievances back to work with them, determined to acquire strength for the next round.

The shop stewards formed the Clyde Workers’ Committee to continue the fight. In a challenge to the trade union bureaucracy, it declared “The support given to the Munitions Act by the officials was an act of treachery to the working class. Those of us who refused to be sold have organised the above Committee, representative of all trades in the Clyde area” and it went on to define its purpose:
"We are out for unity and closer organisation of all trades in the industry, one Union being the ultimate aim. We will support the officials just so long as they rightly represent the workers, but we will act independently immediately they misrepresent them. Being composed of delegates from every shop, and untrammelled by obsolete rule or law, we claim to represent the true feeling of the workers. We can act immediately according to the merits of the case and the desire of the rank and file.” (Willie Gallacher)

In 1915, the government with the “Munitions Act" introduced “dilution of labour” which meant  hiring of new workers without regard to union standards of wages, hours and conditions. To protect union standards and  another upsurge of militacy started. The issue was highlighted in The Worker:
 “ Women in controlled establishments doing work hitherto done by skilled men are to receive a wage of £1 per week. Compared with the wage received by some of these women in other employment, that may mean an advance of from nine to twelve shillings a week. But compare it with the wage of the skilled man whose place she has taken and you find a difference of from 18,/- to £1 per week." It concluded that would mean an actual gain to the employers and a loss not only to the skilled man, but to the entire working class. It means, in fact, a lowering of the whole working class standard.

This movement then received another great impetus from the introduction by the government of a measure for extending the power of conscription, usually referred to as the “Man Power Bill.”

 But to be sure, the union militancy was not as someties presented a preclude to Revolution.  Glasgow was not St Petersburg. Willie Gallagher explained:
 “Let it be clearly understood that we made no claim to power of any kind. Our policy was simply and purely defensive...If the workers are to win out when the war is over sectionalism must go. One organisation for the workers of an industry means strength, and strength means victory. The present multiplicity of Unions spells weakness and the ultimate aim of the Clyde Workers’ Committee is to weld these unions into one powerful organisation that will place the workers in complete control of the industry.”

 James D. MacDougall in The Vanguard wrote: “ The only tactic now open to the workers to adopt is that of the political strike. They have no voice in the House of Commons. The “Labour” members are either too patriotic or too cowardly... the officials are discredited and count for little, the real leaders of the men are to be found in the workshops...the exceptional circumstances at present existing are producing something very like the beginnings of a real industrial union movement. The need for solidarity is breaking down the old craft jealousies, the spread of Socialism is showing to workers their essential unity as a class...the influence of revolutionary Socialism among the Clyde workers has reached a higher point than ever before.”  Overly optimistic, granted but the sentiments were there.

 J.T. Aitken, a ship-worker wrote in The Worker: “Yes; there is trouble on the Clyde. And how has it arisen? It is through a total absence of any sense of fair dealing between employer and employed. The harsh treatment meted out to some workers by unscrupulous firms, taking undue advantage of the Munitions Act has done its work. Hence the revolt.” He describes the aspiration of someone in the midst of war living in a slum were  “The Socialist movement is not actuated by greed for money but is the outward expression of an inner yearning for a fuller and freer life. As Socialists we are out to destroy the present intolerable industrial system, and to substitute a better, wherein the city dwellers shall forget the endless meal of brick and stone, and shall have visions of trees and fields, musical with birds lending charm to the dream-like quiet of the country, where Nature has dealt so bountifully.”

Our own journal, the Socialist Standard, wrote at the time:
"The Clyde trouble of Christmas 1915 is perhaps the best specimen of these sectional and local revolts. The principle of the men was strong, but they were driven down by lies, hunger, victimisation, deportation of their leaders, and, what is more important still, because the strike was local. Instead of abandoning the political machine to ambitious wiseacres and unscrupulous plotters, and letting them, in the secrecy of Cabinet conclaves, everlastingly scheme to set the social changes on you, see to it that those who are now proven the enemies of your class are no longer sent to represent you. Fill their places with class-conscious men of your own ranks, controlled and guaranteed by the political organisation of your own class.Engineers! At an early date you will be confronted with other trouble. We want your demands to be more exacting, and more deep the principles you struggle for. Fight with your brothers of other industries for these bigger and nobler things as earnestly and solidly as you recently fought. Fight politically as well as industrially, then, with the principle of the class struggle to guide your fighting."

In Germany and Austria strikes began on the dire problem of securing of food, but nearly always accompanying this demand, and in some cases forming the sole object, was the call upon the governments to declare an armistice and enter into negotiations for peace. In this country a similar movement spread. A resolution moved at Glasgow at a meeting resolved:
“That having heard the case of the Government, as stated by Sir Auckland Geddes [the manpower Director of Recruiting], this meeting pledges itself to oppose to the very uttermost the Government in its call for more men. We insist and pledge ourselves to take action to enforce the declaration of an immediate armistice on all fronts; and that the expressed opinion of the workers of Glasgow is that from now on, and so far as this business is concerned our attitude all the time and every time is to do nothing in support of carrying on the war, but to bring the war to a conclusion.”

Better late than never the Clyde workers realised that they have nothing to gain but a good deal to lose by the continuance of the war. Lloyd George came to Glasgow to soft-soap the work-force. The first plant he addressed, the head shop steward introduced him to the meeting as “an enemy of the workers”. At the other plants, the stewards refused to gather until he negotiated with the Clyde Workers Committee. On Christmas Day, he tried to address a city-wide meeting of stewards placing the cause for the slaughter of soldiers at the front on the shoulders of the Clyde-workers. When he stopped through sheer exhaustion, Muir of the CWC got up on a seat, instantaneous silence fell, and the workers’ case was presented. Muir repudiated Lloyd George assertions by saying: 
“It is an absolutely untrue and grossly unfair interpretation of our position. Most of us have relatives at the front as well as you, and we are as much interested in their welfare as anybody else can possibly be. What is more, ninety-five per cent. of these men come from our class. They are coming back to our class, and if things continue on the lines they are moving now they are coming back to much worse conditions than they left. We would be traitors to them if we permitted it. We are determined to prevent it if we can, and in doing so we are not fighting for our own hand alone, but also for these men and the workers of the future. The Government is responsible for the slaughter, and you must share the responsibility if you go back to London after having heard our case, and do nothing to further. You need not say it is impossible. The public man who would push it in the House of Commons strenuously would rally the workers of the country behind him. I suggest to you that the next time you have any occasion to refer to responsibility you be a little fairer, and remember our side of the case. We repudiate all responsibility.”

The government naturally retaliated. No less than four papers were suppressed – Forward, The Vanguard, The Socialist, and The Worker. Halls let for meetings were cancelled by the score, and  where public meetings did get held, summonses against the speakers were issued and fines imposed.   Government propaganda denounced the strikers for their self-interest.
"Even now your protest is not on behalf of the working class, but a claim that a small section – the members of the ASE. – should not be placed in the Army until the ‘dilutees’ have been taken. Surely if you did not complain when we smashed agreements and pledges given to the whole working class it is illogical to complain now when a section of that class is being similarly treated.”

This latter fact was indeed a  fatally weak point in the engineers case, and was being used effectively by the capitalist press and spokesmen against them, keeping alive the jealousies and divisions that are so useful to them in their fights with the workers.  A. G. Gardiner, of the Daily News was easily the cleverest of their agents at the game of deluding readers by using a style of seeming honesty and openness to cover up a substance of slimy deceit. A good example of this was his ‘Open Letter to the Clyde Workers’. His articles, while appearing to condemn the government, were strenuous attempts to defend the existence and maintenance of capitalism. Their purpose was to persuade the workers to leave in the hands of the bosses the direction of affairs. And there was a great danger that the workers, so long used to following this course, so long in the habit of following “leaders”, would succumb to this influence. Some of them not daring to trust themselves to manage their own affairs, believe it better to leave management to their "betters" If only half of the blunders and appalling crimes of this war had been brought into the light of day, these timid workers would  have had a rude shock concerning the ability of those “experts.” The Socialist Standard argued that:
 “The biggest danger that confronts them – the biggest mistake they can make – is to place power in the hands of “leaders” under any pretext whatever. It is at once putting those “leaders” in a position to bargain with the master class for the purpose of selling out the workers. It allows the master class to retain control of the political machinery which is the essential instrument for governing society. All the other blunders and mistakes the workers may make will be as dust in the balance compared with this one, and not until they realise this fact will they be on the road to socialism.”

The Fight Against Rent Increases

Class struggle activity also took place outside the workplace and on the streets in general. Many working class women were outraged that while their husbands, sons, fathers and brothers were away fighting and dying for King and Country, they and the children lived in worse conditions and with less money. The  rent increases of 1915 proved massively unpopular. With Glasgow becoming a major centre of arms manuafacture during the war, it was necessary to bring in workers from outside the city, which only added to an already existing overcrowding problem and pushed up rents. With their men fighting at the front, the women left behind were seen as easy prey by landlords, and large increases in rents became the norm. Existing tenants who could no longer afford the rent were evicted, causing widespread alarm. But by October of that year, some 30,000 tenants were withholding rent and huge demonstrations were called whenever bailiffs dared to attempt an eviction. In Govan, an area of Glasgow where shipbuilding was the main occupation, the women organised an effective opposition to the rent increases. When three engineers were arrested for non-payment of rent, some 10,000 workers in Govan downed tools and marched to the court to demonstrate. The initial failure of the government to restrict the raising of rents revealed that the interests of working people in Glasgow were not the real priority of the government. The main figure in the Rent Strike movement was Mary Barbour, later to be elected a Labour Party city councillor, and the protesters soon became known as "Mrs. Barbour's Army".The usual method of preventing eviction was to block the entrance to the tenement. Photographs of the time show hundreds of people participating. If the sheriff officers managed to get as far as the entrance, another tactic was to humiliate them - pulling down their trousers was a commonly used method. The mood of the placards carried by the protesters was that the landlords were unpatriotic. A common message was that while the men were fighting on the front line the landlords were in league with the enemy e.g. "While my father is a prisoner in Germany the landlord is attacking us at home".

In double-quick time the government swiftly introduced rents control to contain the discontent.

Other Events

When Winston Churchill came to Glasgow to speak at a pro-war mass meeting, the affair was organised almost as secretly and conspiratorially in order that only the “right” people might attend. When an attempt was made by reactionaries to organize a strong-arm organization to break up the workers’ meetings, the shop stewards formed defense guards on a factory basis and put a quick stop to it.

On that May Day of 1917 in Glasgow, 80,000 workers marched in the parade itself and its estimated a quarter million lined the street.
“The demonstration declares for the overthrow of the capitalist system of production for profit. It sends its fraternal greetings to the worker’s of all lands,” read the resolution that was passed by the throng massed around the platforms on Glasgow Green. Resolutions of solidarity with the revolutionary Soviets of Russia were cheered and adopted.

The whole of the story of the shop steward movement cannot be given on the blog and we have posted previously cautioning against looking at the political situation as a potentially revolutionary situation, but its romance lives on among workers, not only on the Clyde but  elsewhere, too. There are times when the workers must establish their own legality. There are times when workers cannot accept the “law.” Workers’ organisations cannot always remain passively “law-abiding.” If workers had always been so respectful of legislation there would be no trades unions and  wages would be far lower than now, while working hours would be much longer. Workers have made the gains they have now because they opposed the ruling class and fought every step of the way. Since nothing fundamental has changed in the relationship of the workers to the bosses, there is no reason for the workers to change from the procedure that has brought them their victories.

PUBLIC MEETING

'The Not So Great 1914-18 War' 

8.00pm Wednesday 20th August 2014

Maryhill Community Central Halls, 
304 Maryhill Road,
 Glasgow G20 7YE

Happy Holidays?

When workers get their fortnight release from toil it comes after months of consulting holiday brochures and the search for the cheapest hotel possible but no such scrutiny of hotels is necessary for the owning class. 'Take the Peninsula Paris, which is upping the ante with three "themed" suites this fall as part of a $576 million renovation. The largest of them, the Peninsula Suite, is primed to deliver the royal treatment - 24-hour butler service, on-hand massage, access to an underground spa, a 1934 Rolls-Royce Phantom - for $33,500 per night. (Yahoo Travel, 7 August) RD

Plenty for All

Over-population, our Lords and Masters say, is another cause of our misery. They mean by this, that the resources of the country are inadequate to its population. - William Benbow, Chartist, 1832

No person can deny that the world is beset by numerous problems that are attributed to "overpopulation" - hunger, poverty, pollution, depletion of natural resources, slow economic growth, wars, etc. But is the real cause of these problems over-population. Capitalism tries to get workers to blame themselves for the problems of the world. Capitalism schemes to get people to view themselves rather than the system as the source of their problems. They wish to prove that hunger and poverty are not the fault of the rich for deciding not to produce what people need, but the fault of the poor and hungry for being too many.

The solution to the over-population problem is to overthrow capitalism for if production is geared to the needs of the people and not to filling a few greedy pockets there will be no problem of too many people. If fighting the real social problems of pollution and poverty is to be won then it is to see that the root of the problem is not over-population but capitalism itself. The problem is not one of over population. The earth could sustain a far higher population than already exists, but only if land were cultivated in order to produce food that is needed rather than what is profitable. The central point is that world hunger is not due to the impossibility of producing more food.  If people could decide what they produce, there would be more than enough food for many times the world’s population. Factor in the massive re-organisation of distribution, with the intelligent application of available farming technology, then we can feed masses more people than there currently are. Once we are living in socialism, the release of human creativity to solve the problem of a finite planet and potential ever-expanding population we are sure will provide many strategies that we can't even begin to imagine. New technologies of food production and medicine will be able to do more and more to remove the 'problem' in the first place.

The natural resources are there. The technology is there. The knowledge to produce is there.Mankind is smart enough to travel into space, tunnel into the bowels of the earth, dive deep under the oceans; but we  go hungry in the midst of food. That is capitalism! It cannot be otherwise under capitalism! Instead of plenty for all - the fat of the land for the few and the crumbs for the rest.

The Demographic Transition Model (DTM) is a model used to represent the transition from high birth and death rates to low birth and death rates as a country develops from a pre-industrial to an industrialized economic system. The theory is based on an interpretation of demographic history developed in 1929 by the American demographer Warren Thompson. Thompson observed changes, or transitions, in birth and death rates in industrialized societies over the previous 200 years.Most developed countries are in stage 3 or 4 of the model; the majority of developing countries have reached stage 2 or stage 3. The major (relative) exceptions are some poor countries, mainly in sub-Saharan Africa and some Middle Eastern countries, which are poor or affected by government policy or civil strife, notably Pakistan, Palestinian Territories, Yemen and Afghanistan. In essence, overpopulation is not a problem. Poverty is.

So far productivity through scientific and technological advance has outstripped reduced resources (albeit under capitalism at other costs) but there is no reason to think this cannot continue in a more ecologically sustainable way. he total land area of the planet is about 12 billion hectares, but only 1.3 billion hectares can currently be used as arable land. Even with a population of 10 billion, this would mean 0.13 hectares per person, or something over a third of an acre. If farmed by means of intensive horticulture a plot this size could feed dozens.The average yield in England is about eight tonnes of wheat per hectare per year, enough to feed a couple of dozen people; so the 0.13 hectare per person available once global population settles down would be plenty to feed three or four. The conclusion of such calculations is inescapable: even without genetically-modified crops, the Earth can produce more than enough to feed likely future populations.

The excessive consumption of both renewal and non-renewable resources and the release of waste that nature can’t absorb that currently go on are not just accidental but an inevitable result of capitalism’s very nature. Endless “growth” – and the growing consumption of nature- given materials this involves – is built in to capitalism. However, this is not the growth of useful things as such but rather the growth of money-values.

Socialism is about eventually creating what some call a "steady-state economy" or "zero-growth". A situation where human needs are in balance with the resources needed to satisfy them. Such a society would already have decided on the most appropriate way to allocate resources to meet the needs of its members. This having been done, it would only need to go on repeating this continuously from production period to production period. Production would not be ever-increasing but would be stabilised at the level required to satisfy needs. All that would be produced would be products for consumption and the products needed to replace and repair the raw materials and instruments of production used up in producing these consumer goods. The point about such a situation is that there will no longer be any imperative need to develop productivity. In a stable society such as socialism, needs would most likely change relatively slowly. What it means is that we should construct permanent, durable means of production which you don’t constantly innovate. We would use these to produce durable equipment and machinery and durable consumer goods designed to last for a long time, designed for minimum maintenance and made from materials which if necessary can be re-cycled. In this way we would get a minimum loss of materials; once they’ve been extracted and processed they can be used over and over again. It also means that once you’ve achieved satisfactory levels of consumer goods, you don’t insist on producing more and more. Total social production could even be reduced. This will be the opposite of to-day. Society would move into a stable mode, a rhythm of daily production in line with daily needs with no significant growth which would reconcile two great needs, the need to live in material well being whilst looking after the planet.

On scarcity, its the same. We deny there will be a problem. First we have to define what scarcity is . Orthodox economics argue it is limited supply - versus- boundless demand. Our wants are essentially “infinite” and the resources to meet them, limited, claim the economists. They claim that without the guidance of prices socialism would sink into inefficiency . According to the argument, scarcity is an unavoidable fact of life. And thats what the text-books describe economics as - the allocation of scarce resources.

However, outside the class-room and in the real world, abundance is not a situation where an infinite amount of every good could be produced. Similarly, scarcity is not the situation which exists in the absence of this impossible total or sheer abundance. Abundance is a situation where productive resources are sufficient to produce enough wealth to satisfy human needs, while scarcity is a situation where productive resources are insufficient for this purpose.Abundance is a relationship between supply and demand, where the former exceeds the latter. Achieving abundance can be understood as the maintenance of an adequate buffer of stock in the light of possible future demand. The relative abundance or scarcity of a good would be indicated by how easy or difficult it was to maintain such an adequate buffer stock in the face of a demand trend (upward, static, or downward). It will thus be possible to choose how to combine different factors for production, and whether to use one rather than another, on the basis of their relative abundance/scarcity.

How do we tell when something is becoming scarce? We use the tools and systems that capitalism bequeathes us ,which will be suitably modified and adapted and transformed for the new conditions. There is stock or inventory control systems and logistics. The key to good stock management is the stock turnover rate – how rapidly stock is removed from the shelves – and the point at which it may need to be re-ordered. So its a matter of simply monitoring the shelves.The maintenance of surplus stocks would provide a buffer against unforeseen fluctuations in demand

In a particular situation of actual physical shortage we can use substitution and by whats described as the law of the minimum - you economise most on those factors of production that are relatively scarcest.

If people over-consume then communism cannot possibly work.

Humans behave differently depending upon the conditions that they live in. Human behaviour reflects society. In capitalism, people's needs are not met and people feel insecure. People tend to acquire and hoard goods because possession provides some security. People have a tendency to distrust others because the world is such a rat-race.

Under capitalism, there is a very large industry devoted to creating needs. Capitalism requires consumption, whether it improves our lives or not, and drives us to consume up to, and past, our ability to pay for that consumption. In a system of capitalist competition, there is a built-in tendency to stimulate demand to a maximum extent. Firms, for example, need to persuade customers to buy their products or they go out of business. They would not otherwise spend the vast amounts they do spend on advertising.

There is also in capitalist society a tendency for individuals to seek to validate their sense of worth through the accumulation of possessions. When the wealth of the ruling class so preoccupies the minds of its members, such a notion of status will be deep-rooted within workers . It is this which helps to underpin the myth of infinite demand. It does not matter how modest one's real needs may be or how easily they may be met; capitalism's "consumer culture" leads one to want more than one may materially need since what the individual desires is to enhance his or her status within this hierarchal culture of consumerism and this is dependent upon acquiring more than others have got. But since others desire the same thing, the economic inequality inherent in a system of competitive capitalism must inevitably generate a pervasive sense of relative deprivation. What this amounts to is a kind of institutionalised envy and an alienated capitalism.

In socialism, status based upon the material wealth would be a meaningless concept. The notion of status based upon the conspicuous consumption of wealth would be devoid of meaning because individuals would stand in equal relation to the means of production and have free access to goods and services. Why take more than you need when you can freely take what you need? In socialism the only way in which individuals can command the esteem of others is through their contribution to society.

Work in socialist society could only be voluntary since there would be no group in a position to force people to work against their will.This will work to ensure that a socialist society is run on the basis of democratic consensus. The sense of mutual obligations and of universal interdependency would influence perceptions and affect their behaviour.

No Pay Rise for Scots

Average earnings in Scotland will not return to their pre-recession level until 2016 at the earliest, new analysis for the Scottish Government suggests. While the country's economy has returned to the level it was at before the economic crisis hit, wage levels have not made the same progress. Average earnings have fallen back to 2005 levels.

Tough At The Top

MPs like to project the image of self-sacrifice for the good of the nation but the recent resignation from parliament of the Conservative MP Mark Simmonds is hardly a good example of such sacrifice. He had a housing allowance of £27,875 on top of his £89,435 salary and yet revealed that the financial drain of being an MP was too hard to bear.  'The sacrifice to my family has become intolerable' (Sunday Times, 17 August) Such hardships were too much for Mr Simmonds to bear even though he had claimed £170,000 in expenses last year. Ah, the unimaginable rigours of being an MP! RD

Class Contempt

It is always interesting to know what the owning class think about the working class and Michael O'Leary the outspoken CEO of Ryanair makes no secret of his contempt. 'MBA students come out with "My staff is my most important asset'. Bullshit. Staff is unusually your biggest  cost. We all employ some lazy bastards who need a kick up the backside." (Times, 16 August) This contempt is staggering when all owning  class's profits are the result of the exploitation of the working class. RD

Reasons to Hate Capitalism

Capitalism means every individual's hand raised against all others; its motto is: “One man's misfortune is another man's opportunity". For few to live in luxury many more must live in penury and die in poverty. The conditions imposed by capitalism lowers man to the level of the brute. Never in our history have workers been asked to do so much for so little.

Capitalism encourages greed, anti-social behavior, diminished empathy and lack of remorse which is good for capitalists and richly rewarding for share-holders. But for the average  normal person like you and me  it destroys our communities, which rely on altruism, compassion and concern for others. Capitalism is a system of minority privilege and class rule based on the private ownership of means of livelihood. This gives a few rich people the power to buy and sell jobs, which means they can build or destroy entire communities that depend on those jobs.

Capitalism proclaims the virtue of naked self-interest, but self-interest without regard for morality, ecology or common sense leads to environmental degradation, destruction of indigenous communities, colonialism, war and other forms of mass destruction. Self-interest leads capitalists to seek profit absolutely everywhere, regardless of the damage done to other people and the health of the planet’s ecosystem. Self-interest leads capitalists to destroy any rival economic system or way of thinking (such as indigenous communal land use and respect for nature) that can be a barrier to their endless quest for profit.

Capitalists praise freedom and individualism, but discourages freedom and individualism for everyone but themselves. The vast majority of us who work for a living are daily asked to uncritically follow orders, to act as if we are machines, and limit our creativity to what profits our bosses. Capitalists denigrate cooperation and collectivism, but create mass production processes that rely on both from workers. Their system requires us to be cogs in a giant profit-making machine, but because they fear the power this gives us we are told working together for our own interests is illegitimate and bad. Thus capitalists undermine unions and other organizations that encourage workers to cooperate with each other and act collectively.

Capitalism requires the largest propaganda system the world has ever known to convince us it is the only system possible. It turns people into consumers through advertising, marketing, entertainment and even so-called news. Millions around the world are employed to use their creativity to twist our feelings of love, desire, human solidarity and fairness into tools of manipulation, so that ever more profits can flow into the hands of a tiny minority.

 Capitalism is not a friend to democracy but ultimately its enemy. When pushed, capitalists choose capitalism over democracy. If people use democracy to weaken the power of capitalists the rich and powerful turn to various forms of fascism in order to keep their privileges. Capitalism is a system in which the principle of one dollar, one vote, dominates that of one person, one vote. Those who own the most shares (bought with their dollars) control giant corporations, many of which are more powerful than all but a few governments. Rich people also use their money to dominate the elections that are supposed to give us all one, equal vote. Under capitalism those with the most money are entitled to the most goods and services as well as the most say in directing our governments and our economy.

Capitalism is a cancer taking over our planet. Capitalists make profits from global warming, from destroying our oceans, from pumping ever more chemicals into the atmosphere and from patenting everything they can, including life itself. Only by getting rid of capitalism can we rescue our environment. It rests with us to make an end of this.

 Capitalists have attacked you with every weapon at their command. they have battered down your wages to subsistence  levels. They have cast you on the scrap-heap of unemployment in millions. They have gagged your every protest. Working men and women! To hell with their capitalist politics! We must stand together against them. The only struggle for us is the struggle of the workers against their exploiters. Despite the attempts of the capitalists, their government, politicians, courts,and their henchmen to divide, derail and smash the workers’ movement, it continues to go forward and through many battles to grow. The working class faces the situation where the capitalist rulers whose system is once again in deep crisis, are stepping up their drive to wring even more profit from the workers under the fine-sounding name of “productivity,” and hand in hand with it, wage cuts, massive layoffs, and forced overtime–these are the main forms of attack on the working class today. And in the life and death battle against these attacks the movement of the working class is growing and gaining in strength and solidarity. All over the world the struggle is raging.

Capitalists try to present their rule and their system of exploitation as eternal.

Today millions of workers continue to fight back, in many forms, against the attempts of the capitalists to squeeze more profit from the labour of the workers and to grind the great majority of society into the dirt to keep their profit-seeking system going. Millions of people have come to realise that something is basically rotten with the whole society and begin to search out more deeply the connections between various struggles in society, the cause of the abuses and outrages they were fighting against and the solution to them.

Throughout society the capitalists are mounting their attacks, cutting back on funds for education, health, housing and other vital needs of the people, which are sacrificed more and more for the capitalists’ need for profit. And along with all this they practice and promote prejudice and try to divert the anger of people against each other–and away from the capitalists themselves.  The working class has no interest in competition in its ranks – it is the rule of capital that forces workers to compete for jobs and for survival. To demonstrate our strength and our unity we must stand together. No worker must stand against a worker to the advantage of the capitalists.

There is only one way that all the suffering caused by capitalism can be finally ended – by wiping out its source, capitalism. And there is only one force in society that can bring this about – the working class, uniting against the capitalists all those who suffer under their rule. This is why the aim of the working class, through all its daily battles against the capitalists, must not only be to win whatever concessions. can be wrung from them today, but to build the strength and unity of the working class and build for the day when it will be able to overthrow the capitalists altogether.

No political party can represent both capitalist and worker, for the capitalist lives by exploiting the worker and the worker lives for the day he can end this exploitation. The capitalists usually have more than one party, because of their need to compete with each other and to deceive people. But they all stand upon the backs of the workers, and differ on only over their share of the plunder. We warn the workers against believing in politicians’ promises. The class that does all the  thinking and sweating, that produces all the wealth, and without which the world could not survive, that is the class that deserves to enjoy life. Capitalism deserves to die.

Adapted from Gary Engler on this website

Reading Notes

The so-called elite is talking of the Alien Contract Labour Bill that Would end the importation of cheap labour from Europe to work in mills and factories and undermine the unions and drive wages down, "We all know if alien labour is halted American labour will become arrogant and overweening and demand impossible wages and conditions, and that will be the end of the American progress and wealth. You will not be able to compete in foreign markets."("Captain and the Kings" by Taylor Caldwell). Since this is the nineteenth century when workers toiled for fourteen hours a day for literally starvation wages, one wonders exactly what those 'impossible wages and conditions would be. The speaker is right, though, when he points out that anyone paying wages above the rest will not be able to compete. Capitalism is always forced to create a race to the bottom. The thing is, it is no different today as, unless wages in the northern hemisphere continue to droop dramatically, more and more jobs will go south. John Ayers.

Are Co-ops the Solution?

In the United States the word “socialism” provokes negative connotations of Stalin and the Cold War despite the surprising success of Eugene Debs of the Socialist Party of America at the beginning of the 20th Century where the gerry-mandering of the franchise excluded many blacks, poor whites and immigrants, yet he achieved almost a million votes when he stood for president, 12% of the vote. Still, the word “socialism" conjures up a vision of the Soviet Union’s authoritarian one-party state and its centrally planned economics, controlled by Big Brother bureaucrats and the gulags for any dissenters.

An alternative term for the society socialists aspired towards has been “cooperative commonwealth”. This sounds more positive to an American public. After all, the states Massachusetts, Kentucky, Pennsylvania or Virginia, all call themselves commonwealths in their constitutions. The idea of an economic system based on cooperatives has also found a more receptive hearing. America has known many utopian schemes that had co-operatives as its basis. There has been political parties that have promoted co-operatives as policy.  In the 1930s, the populist Farmer-Labor Party could issue a radical platform:
“We declare that capitalism has failed and that immediate steps must be taken by the people to abolish capitalism in a peaceful and lawful manner, and that a new, sane, and just society must be established, a system in which all the natural resources, machinery of production, transportation, and communications shall be owned by the government and operated democratically for the benefit of all the people, and not for the benefit of the few. Palliative measures will continue to fail. Only a complete reorganization of our social structure into a cooperative commonwealth will bring economic security and prevent a prolonged period of further suffering among the people.”

In Washington state the Washington Commonwealth Federation, based on similar ideas, won control of the state Democratic Party during the late 1930s and early 1940s. In a parallel development in Canada, the Cooperative Commonwealth Federation (CCF) was formed with some prominent Socialist Party of Canada members joining.

Today, having fleshed-out their own visions of the Cooperative Commonwealth, Richard Wolff and Gar Alperovitz have been getting a lot of exposure on the alternative media websites for their own “radical"  models for a co-operative economy. But exactly what is there in their proposals to get excited about? They insist that they are challenging capitalism by presenting alternatives to capitalism, but in the end all they offer are prescriptions for curing capitalism. In their mythical “market-socialism” workers would be self-exploited.

The socialist case against capitalism is not whether there exists 'good' or 'bad' capitalism, or that there are 'fair' or 'unfair' capitalists. Our opposition is to the capitalist system in its entirety. Whether someone works for an employer or works as part of a co-op is neither here nor there. It's all just a job. Co-operatives are still capitalist institutions i.e. capital - even if it's "collective" or "democratic" or "social" capital - is invested to make more capital. Co-operatives that exist under a market economy inevitably replicate the problems of capitalism due to market pressures as Chomsky points out, as well as Marx’s criticisms of them.

"First, you can’t “out-compete” capitalism. Corporations will always have larger capital to invest in research, technology, and their willingness to cut costs through lower wages, less environmentally sounds practices, out-sourcing, etc, will give them an advantage.
Second, is that co-operatives are subject to market pressures to compete just the same as capitalist enterprises and this lends itself to pressures to create the same practices of corporations."
Third, is that many cooperatives face the same issues as small business owners face. Often worker co-operatives are in the service, food or other specialty industries with lower profit margins and because they are smaller and do not have the advantages of scale which larger companies do.
Lastly is the tendency of worker co-operatives to see their needs and interests as an entity apart from and/or above other workers. After all, as cooperatives exist within a market system, their interests are to compete with other companies and expand their market share."

https://machete408.wordpress.com/2013/03/28/self-managed-capitalism-criticism-of-richard-wolff-and-workers-cooperatives/

Firms in a competitive market have to compete. That doesn't have to be on price, but they do have to be profitable (even non-profits need to turn a surplus to cover unforeseen costs, reinvestment, downturns). That means that if you want to pay better wages and/or work shorter hours/with less intensity than rival firms, you've got to make up the difference somewhere to remain competitive to continue to exist.

Savings on managerial salaries make up a bit. Maybe you can charge a bit more for your product due to the goodwill of a co-op. But that's a niche strategy, not one for market domination. Hence many existing co-ops are operating in premium-priced niche markets (fair trade coffee, organic food etc).

Another route is to pay less and/or work longer hours. Lots of co-ops go this route, and use co-op ideology to justify the sacrifices 'for the cause'. But this undermines the original objective of an anti-capitalist alternative. Typically as these co-ops grow, newer workers don't share the ideological work ethic, and you get the (re-)emergence of managerial hierarchy and a two-tier workforce. There have even been strikes at co-ops over issues like this. Mondragon frequently hailed as a model to follow is a normal capitalist business as they hire workers and exploit them.  The Mondragon collectives are the seventh  largest company in Spain and in 1965 the fascist regime of Franco awarded Father Arizmendi, the founder of Mondragon, with the Gold Medal for Merit in Work.  In Mussolini’s fascist Italy by 1927 there were 7,131 co-ops and by 1942 the number had swelled to 14,576. There was little fear that these “alternative” modes of production threatened the economic system. So it can hardly be claimed as subversive. As Sharryn Kasmir’s “The Myth of Mondragon” explains they “embodied worker participation, non-conflictual relations between labor and management, and the withering away of class identifications.” The Basque Workers Council in their magazine,  charged the cooperatives with:
“Becoming like any private firm, from the point of view of daily work, the cooperative member is exploited in his/her job in a capitalist firm by increased production, mobility, schedule changes, etc. We don’t understand why the managers don’t present a proposal to lower the age of retirement in the cooperatives…Instead, they opted, just like owners of private firms, to achieve profitability by the same methods as capitalist firms: lay-offs, increasing productivity, temporary contracts, etc.” In 2008-2009 period, the group fired thousands of workers, mainly people with temporary contracts, exactly the same politic as other ‘fully capitalist’ corporations.

Socialists are anti-capitalists - we don't want markets or private/ state owned means of production. Co-ops can't bring about the revolutionary change we desire. Even if all businesses in the world were workers' co-ops, we'd still have inequality (some would compete more successfully than others), we'd still be destroying the environment (market economy means it's profitable to externalize costs), we'd still have unemployment (taking on more workers means splitting the profits with more people, so low incentive to hire), we'd still have alienated work conditions as a norm (exploit yourselves to be more competitive).

It is accurate as Woolf says unions are “reduced to improving the terms of the employer-employee relation for the workers. There was no strategy to eliminate that relation in favor of something better. It was the modern equivalent of struggles during the time of slavery that aimed for better food, clothing, housing, etc. for slaves rather than demanding the end of slavery.” http://www.democracyatwork.info/articles/2013/03/a-new-strategy-for-labor-and-the-left/

But he fails to perceive that his solution is akin to allowing small groups of slaves on a small number of plantations to self-manage themselves. It makes life better for some, but it doesn’t end the system of slavery. Workers at a capitalist enterprise facing pay cuts can take direct action such as strike action against it. But workers at a co-op cannot do this as they would just be striking against themselves!

Seeing co-operatives as anything other than a temporary and partial solution at improving your working lifestyle is definitely a mistake. If co-ops are to be taken as something more than a palliative measure to problems at work, then those involved would be in for a disappointment. Although co-ops are not a means to replace capitalism, worker co-operatives can have some uses for ourselves such as a non-hierarchal way to run socialist movement infrastructure like bookshops, cafés etc

Included are  some contributions from the Libcom forum 

Recovery For Whom?

The press and TV are lauding the government for what they are describing as an economic recovery. 'The Bank of England yesterday upgraded its growth forecast to 3.5 per cent for this year and to 3 per cent for 2015.' (Times, 14 August) Whilst this turnaround has enthused bankers and investors it has meant very little to the working class as the press article goes on to explain quoting figures from the Office of National Statistics. 'Employment growth was still strong but wages grew by only by 0.6 per cent in the three months leading up to June. This was a period in which inflation was running at at 1.9 per cent, which means that real wages, at a time of economic growth, have been falling.' What has been a period of boom for the capitalist class has seen a worsening of conditions for wage earners. RD

Support socialism and socialists

The Socialist Party is a political party based on Marxism which has taken up the banner of socialist revolution. The world is rich in natural resources and is capable of satisfying the needs of all its people. A handful of capitalists control our planet and make fabulous profits off the toil of working people. All the major means of production - the factories, the mines, communications and transportation – are concentrated in the hands of a few thousand capitalists who employ millions of workers. All misery is created by this small clique of very wealthy individuals so they can continue to line their pockets. Every bit of capitalists’ vast possessions was stolen from the people.  It’s the capitalists that get rich by appropriating the fruits of our labour. In reality, a worker gets paid for only a small part of the value he produced. The rest, the surplus value, goes straight into the boss’s pocket. It is robbery.

The employers get rich, not because they have “taken risks” or “worked harder,” as they would have us believe. The capitalists and their spokesmen endlessly vaunt the merits of a system where “everyone has an equal opportunity,” and “democracy rules.” But the truth is that capitalist democracy is a hoax: a paradise for the rich and powerful, a trap and an illusion for the exploited and the poor.The more they can steal from us and the greater their profits. The idea that everyone can get rich under this system is a lie invented by the rich themselves. Under capitalism, the only way to get rich is to exploit someone else. This is why workers have only one choice: either submit to this wage slavery or fight it! Capitalism is a system based on a handful of parasites who live off the backs of the workers and could not care less about their situation. No matter where we look there are thousands of real restrictions with which the capitalists keep the workers in chains and the government are bound by a thousand ties to the capitalists. The state is used as an economic tool by the wealthy. When they face bankruptcy the state steps in and bails them out.

The state serves to spread capitalist ideas to accept the ruling class and uses a whole series of education and propaganda institutions: the schools, the press radio and television networks, through which it spreads its lies daily. The rich has tried everything over the years to put an end to crises. It has used cuts, wage freezes and all sorts of attacks against working people to transfer the weight of the crisis onto the working class. Different groups of capitalists are engaged in deadly competition, each trying to seize more power and profit and control over the economy. Each party claims it is the most fit to run the country, and criticises the shortcomings of the other. No political party can offer real convincing solutions to the problems facing the country, an ever-smaller number of billionaires whose only goal it to maximize profits. Political parties merely compete to prove who is the most faithful servant of capital, while they throw out a few crumbs to the masses to pick up votes.There can never be class peace between exploiter and exploited, between boss and worker. Pro-capitalist parties stand not only for the exploitation of workers.

Reformists aims to lead the working class into collaboration with the capitalist class. Reformist try to convince workers that the solution lies in collaboration between workers and bosses, in everyone tightening their belts and making sacrifices for the “common good.” But there are no common interests between the working class and the bourgeoisie. All that the working class has won in the past from the capitalists has been the result of hard struggle. The working class strengthens itself through education and democratic debates. To defeat the enemy we need unity. The working class must wage a political struggle independent of all bourgeois parties. We must do more than struggle against one boss after another over particular economic questions. The working class must unite its struggles and aim its attack at all the capitalists.

Only socialism can respond to the just aspirations of the working class. The working class will overthrow the capitalists and build socialism. Capitalism is ripe for socialist revolution. The working class is the largest and the most consistently revolutionary class. The workers produce the riches of society, it is they who most directly experience capitalist exploitation and it is their labour which turns the wheels of industry. Despite the many differences that exist among the workers – between the various types of workers, between employed and unemployed, between men and women, and among the workers of different nationalities – all have the same fundamental interests in overthrowing the capitalist system. By forging the greatest possible unity within its ranks, the proletariat can succeed in its struggle for liberation. For, in the long run, the tiny minority of exploiters cannot stand up before the organised might of the working class. The enemies of the working class are in reality a small isolated minority, and the Socialist Party can rally the vast majority of the population under its banner to the cause of socialist revolution. Only the destruction of capitalism and the establishment of socialism will guarantee the liberation of all people.

One of the greatest dangers to the unity of working people is nationalism. Those who are defenders of capitalism are no allies of the working class. In order for the socialist revolution to triumph the working class must win the struggle against nationalism that weakens the whole workers against its common enemy, the capitalist class. The capitalists use the slogan “national interests” to keep workers down. The ruling class uses nationalism to consolidate its domination over the working people. Separatism and independence is a strategy designed to strengthen the native rich and enable it to develop into masters of a new state. Nationalist leads to the division of the working class and the delay of the victory of socialism.

To end capitalism, there must have a clear plan. It must determine what the nature of the struggle is, who are its main enemies, and who are its friends that can be rallied to its cause. A socialist revolution has had as its objective is to overthrow the capitalist class. Socialism will mean the end of the exploitation of man by man. There will be an end to all exploitation. It will bring freedom to all those oppressed by capital and open up a new period of history. Working people will participate directly in running of society from top to bottom. Workers will administer the vast riches of the planet, its lands, forests, mineral resources, lakes and rivers as well as the means of production, for the common benefit of all. The natural and man-made wealth will be the property of the people and not of individual capitalists. Socialist will be a planned economy so gone will be the anarchy of capitalist production. The resources of society will be distributed according to the needs of the people, not to satisfy a few capitalists’ hunger for profits as is the case today. The enormous waste of capitalism will be abolished. All social inequalities will be abolished; there will be no rich and no poor, and all members of society will contribute to the common good. The differences between workers and farmers, town and country, and manual and intellectual work will disappear. Each individual will develop to his or her full potential.

Dundee Despair

There are “desperate” people living in impoverished conditions in Dundee — and they aren’t getting the “urgent help” they need. A reliance on foodbanks, lack of employment prospects and the rise of living costs were highlighted as some of the main concerns in Dundee.

In a survey, 53% said they didn’t believe enough was being done to fight poverty, with 48% feeling less positive about poverty in the future and 40% feeling “very concerned” about the issue. Over half — 61% — said they had cut back on spending since the recession, including on essentials such as food and clothing, with 19% saying they had no disposable income. A massive 70% of respondents to our survey believe that reliance on foodbanks is set to rise in the future. A total of 53% of respondents said drug abuse is getting worse in Dundee — the same number as those who believe more should be done about poverty. And nearly half (47%) felt that there is not enough support available. Thirteen per cent said they saw their future outwith the city.

Solicitor Peter Kinghorn, of Dundee North Law Centre, has noted a spike in clients being sanctioned by the Job Centre — driving them further into poverty. He said: “If people are sanctioned they can be left with no money for weeks, plunging them into poverty and forcing them to live on charity. “We have also seen a substantial increase in people being taken to court by debt collecting companies. Some of these debts are old Department of Work and Pensions debts, such as overpaid tax credits, child benefits and others. This is obviously having an impact on poverty, and we are seeing a large number of clients who are struggling to juggle everything — rent, bills, benefits and general living costs.”

Dave Morris, manager at Dundee Foodbank, said “While we see crisis cases where money has run out, it’s not a surprise that nearly two-thirds of respondents have cut back on spending — cost of living inflation rising faster than wage inflation will affect what people are able to buy, there are also issues around minimal pay and contract hours, which are affecting more people.

The operators of a Dundee foodbank expect to help 6,500 people this year, it has emerged. The fact the number of people relying on foodbanks is still projected to rise is cause for concern.