What Poverty Means?

Parents can feel “like an outcast” if they are unable to provide their children with computers and tablets to help them do their homework, MSPs have been told by anti-poverty campaigner Brian Scott who spoke about the “underlying discrimination” which can leave parents feeling “a sense of failure” and “embarrassed”. He made the comments as a headteacher from one of Scotland’s most deprived primary schools told how learning could be impacted as poverty has limited the experiences of some youngsters.

 Nancy Clunie, head-teacher at Dalmarnock Primary School in Glasgow, recalled how she organised a school outing after a primary seven pupil told her he had never seen the sea. Ms Clunie, who has 40 years experience in classrooms, told MSPs on Holyrood’s Education Committee that strains on family finances meant children’s experiences were “much more limited”. She said: “My children are being faced with texts talking about farms or the seaside and many of them have never experienced it. One wee boy in primary seven said to me last year ‘Miss Clunie, what is the sea?’ “We went straight upstairs and we booked a bus, and we took the kids. It was to Lunderston Bay … that’s the river, but for that child it was the sea, and for that child it might be the only chance he’s got.”

https://www.scotsman.com/news/education/poverty-makes-scots-parents-feel-like-outcasts-1-4734013

Socialism – or perish! That's the choice

One of the plainest phenomena of recent years has been the sharp swing to the Right that has taken place everywhere in the world.  What is the reason for this occurrence?  Once again it is the war crisis that strips bare the pretenders and betrayers within the working class, that separate the opportunists, the social patriots, the sectarians, from the revolutionary socialists. We must judge any and every statement of the question of war in relation to its class validity. No evasions, no half-truths can be accepted. The only answer to war is the full answer, the only possible answer, the Marxist, the revolutionary answer. with no sugar-coating.

There are two ways open to the people today. We can continue under capitalism, or we can take the path to socialism. It is our aim in the Socialist Party to build a society in which all are able to live a full life, free of class distinctions and divisions which condition development along prescribed lines. But we do not believe that this can be done for the people. It can only be done by the people.  Socialism, once a distant dream, is now a reality for all to achieve where the principle is 'from each according to ability to each according to needs,' and where, in the words of the Communist Manifesto "the free development of each is the condition for the free development of all". Such is the policy and perspective of the Socialist Party of Great Britain. We in the Socialist Party hate capitalism with our heads and with our hearts because we see in it an out-dated social system, an anomaly in our present world, holding back that wonderful development of technique and material resources that the present state of our knowledge could turn to the well-being of the people. We see in it a social system that carries within itself slumps and wars, poverty amidst plenty, oppression. We want to end it as soon as possible. We aim at replacing the present capitalist system by socialism, understood as a system where there will be common ownership of the means of production and distribution,  a society that will secure for the producers by hand or by brain, the full fruits of their industry. We envisage socialism as a society where material wealth will be in the hands of those who produce it, where the exploitation of man by man will be ended, where production will be used not for profit, where a new relationship of fraternity will develop between peoples based on equality, where individual men and women will find totally new possibilities to develop their capacities. Although we strive to replace capitalism by socialism, we all of us believe that it is both possible and essential to fight now, within capitalism to defend and improve an immediate lot of the working people. We understand therefore the great importance trade unions, community and environmental organisations, and support every way to strengthen them. But more importantly we also see the need to win the overwhelming majority of the population for the fight against capitalism and for socialism.

As Marxists and as the experiences of the international working class movement has shown that without the winning of political power, no successful advance to socialism is possible. This, after all, is the essence of the old conflict of revolution versus evolution, because revolution means, in essence, a change of political power. We Marxists do not believe that the state in Britain is in essence different from the state in any capitalist country. We do not believe that it is neutral or above classes, and we do believe that in order to advance to socialism in Britain it is necessary for the working class majority to take political power out of the hands of the capitalists and to so that it becomes an instrument of the will of the majority. The Socialist Party has never said that violence is an aim in itself. A revolution means a change in political power, a change in state power; it does not necessarily mean a violent bloody insurrection. Our aim in Britain is to win over legally, constitutionally and peacefully the majority of the British people, pledged to carry through a radical economic and political transformation with fellow-workers around the world. But even though we have always made it clear that an aim is not a guarantee and that the form of the transition to socialism does not depend on the working people alone. We do not stand for violence, but if violence should be used by the old ruling class against the people, then the people themselves will, with all legitimacy behind them, have to find appropriate methods to deal with it.  Whether other countries'  revolutions are necessarily violent and illegal (against existing law) depends on the balance of class forces in the world in the given country at any particular moment and depends too on the traditions, customs, institutions of that particular country.  The essential enemy is modern capitalism. British capitalism is the oldest, most cunning, most skilled, most experienced in the world. It is no mean enemy to overcome and we would do wrong in any way to underestimate it. To defeat capitalism we need all our resources, and the best is unity for the common struggle.

Congratulations to Celtic

Celtic will provide free sanitary products for women at its stadium which will be available at no cost in all female toilets.bCampaigners hoped to highlight period poverty and increase the visibility of women's issues in a football context.

Labour MSP Monica Lennon said: "This is a brilliant victory for the activists who have been campaigning to secure free access to sanitary products at Celtic Park. After discussions with fans, I'm delighted that Celtic have taken this progressive step to become the first football club in the UK to provide free sanitary products. Menstruation should never be a barrier for women participating in football or supporting their team. As part of my ongoing campaign to tackle period poverty, I'm meeting the Scottish Football Association next month regarding its policies on menstruation for all football clubs in Scotland. Congratulations to Celtic and the campaigners who have fought for this positive step. I look forward to other football clubs and businesses across Scotland following their lead."

http://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-43979497

THE WAY OF THE SOCIALIST REVOLUTION

In the race for profits, the capitalists continually expand their production in order to throw the greatest possible amount of goods onto the market. But their production and expansion are anarchistic, that is, it is not organised according to any rational social plan based on the real needs of the majority of the population. Working people have always had to work hard for a living – and still do. We live in a World where, despite the richness in natural resources and productive capacities, peoples’ standard of living is declining and the gap between the rich and poor is steadily widening not narrowing.

Many people will say that they have lived in the former Soviet Union or Eastern European Bloc and that they want no part of it. Let’s look at the Soviet Union – an example of what socialism is not. The Russian economy and state were ruled by a new exploiting class. The separate enterprises and the entire economy were dominated by the profit motive. Managers had the power to speed-up, lay off and fire workers. Managers’ salaries depended on the productivity of their particular enterprises. Unions negotiated with management for contracts much as we do. Black markets flourished. “Democracy” existed only for the new ruling class, not for the majority of the working people. The U.S.S.R. competes with the U.S.A. to divide the world’s people under their respective spheres of influence. Its forms of aid to countries and movements around the world deliberately build dependency on the Soviet Union, not self-reliance. When members of its “family” stepped out of line as Czechoslovakia did in 1968 or Hungary in 1956, the Soviet rulers used their full political, economic and military strength to repress them. None of the above are features of a socialist society. They describe a country ruled by a new privileged bureaucrat-capitalist class, where the working population is exploited and oppressed. Anyone who defends this kind of country as socialist only serves to confuse people as to what socialism is really all about, and what socialists actually stand for. It is very important for working people to discuss these questions seriously. They are directly connected with the problems we experience every day of our lives. The myriad of so-called socialist and communist groups who claim to be the vanguard does not represent the interests of the working class.  Nor will class-consciousness be built by any one of the hosts of left-wing sects presently vying for the workers’ favour. It is not through “revolutionary phrase-mongering”, or opportunist interventions in the class struggle, that workers will be won to accept socialist ideas and become genuinely “class-conscious”. If any such group begins luring people with the bait of reform promises from a desire to further their own interests as the self-proclaimed vanguard of the class struggle”, then it is not really acting in the interests of their fellow-workers. 

Socialism is the end of exploitation of one class by another has been eliminated. Production develops not for profit but according to the needs of the people. It is the community that controls what is produced and how it is distributed, not a tiny handful of capitalists. It is only through building a socialist society that we can solve the basic problems that we face. Socialism and only socialism will create a world without national barriers, without international rivalries, without master and slave nations and, hence, a world without war. World socialism will not be a government of a dominant economic class but will be an administration of all the peoples that inhabit the globe. Its primary duty will be to conduct the affairs of the world with the aim of eliminating poverty, joblessness, hunger and general insecurity. Its sole criterion would be the needs of the people. Socialism will end the root evil of modern society, i.e., the private ownership of the means of production, the factories, mines, mills, machinery, and land, which produce the necessities of life. Socialism will guarantee peace, security, and freedom and prevent the destruction of mankind. With socialism, these instruments of production will become the property of society, owned in common, producing for use, for the general welfare of the people as a whole. With the abolition of the private ownership of the means of life and with it the factor of profit as the prime mover of production, the sharp divisions of society between nations and classes will disappear. Then, and only then, will society be in a position to become a social order of abundance and plenty for all, for socialism will create a new world of genuine cooperation and collaboration between the peoples of the Earth. In abolishing classes in society, socialism will change the form and type of governments which exist today. Governments will become administrative bodies regulating production and consumption. They will not be the instruments of the capitalist class, i.e., capitalist governments whose main reason for existence is to guarantee the political as well as the economic rule of big business, their profits, their private ownership of the instruments of production, and the conduct of war in the economic and political interests of this class. The preoccupation of decision-making in socialism will be to assist and to improve continually the living standards of the people, to extend their leisure time and thus make it possible to heighten the cultural level of the whole world. The aim of socialism is not the increased exploitation and intensification of labour, but the utilization of machinery, technology, science, and invention to diminish toil, to create time in which to permit all the people to enjoy the benefits of social progress.

In abolishing classes, class government and war, socialism will at the same time destroy all forms of dictatorship, political as well as economic. The socialist world state will be the freest, most democratic society the world has ever known, with the world government truly representing the majority of the population and subject to its recall. A citizen of a socialist society will look back upon the capitalist era with its wars, destruction and bloody and cruel dictatorships as we now look back upon the Dark Ages. World socialism will assess the productive potential of the world, determine its resources, the needs of the people and plan production with the aim of increasing the standards of living of a free people, creating abundance, increasing leisure and opportunity for cultural enjoyment. Socialism will not concern itself with profits and war, but with providing a decent life for all the people. The modern world contains all the pre-conditions necessary for socialism. All about us, we observe gigantic industrial establishments containing machinery which could produce the goods of life in abundance. Mankind has developed a marvelous technology. The discovery and control of atomic energy have not only made it more possible for mankind to control the natural and social environment to create a fruitful life of abundance but has made it imperative. Socialism will place at the disposal of science and the scientists all the material means to help create an ever-improving social life for mankind. Only socialism can place science and technology where they properly belong: in the service of the people

Humanity is at a crossroads. We can travel the road of capitalism, the road of chaos, war, poverty, and barbarism, or we can take the socialist path toward true freedom, peace and security, towards a society of plenty for all which would end the exploitation of man by man for all time.

Auld Reekie's Needy

Hard-up families in Einburgh are relying on  foodbanks in record numbers, the Evening News revealed.

 Saughton-based charity Edinburgh Food Project handed out more than 9,500 emergency food supplies this year – up 18.5 per cent on last year and more than double the number five years ago. The shocking figures were labelled a “disgrace” while anti-poverty campaigners called for greater help and support for the poorest. 

“We don’t want to be here forever,” said Bethany Monaghan, foodbank manager of Edinburgh Food Project. “No one in Edinburgh should need a foodbank’s help and we want to see an end to local people needing emergency food at all. It doesn’t have to be this way,” said Ms Monaghan. “With a benefits system that catches people before they fall into crisis, and secure work that provides people with enough money to cover the cost of essentials, this is possible. “But until that time, we’ll continue to provide vital support when it matters most. “We’re dedicated to ensuring that people in our community with no money for food are able to access emergency support, and that has only been possible in the last year because of the incredible generosity shown by local people in donating food, time and funds. Thank you.”

The 9,536 three-day emergency food supplies were provided to crisis-hit families between April 2017 and March 2018 in North West, Central and East of Edinburgh. This compared to 7,767 the previous year and only 3,612 back in 2013/14. A third of the supplies this year – 3,162 – went to children. The 18.5 per cent rise in Edinburgh over the last year is above the UK average of 13 percent.

 A member of The Trussell Trust’s network of foodbanks, EFP attributes the rise in Edinburgh to people struggling with continued issues with benefit payments.

https://www.scotsman.com/regions/edinburgh-fife-lothians/foodbank-use-at-record-high-across-capital-1-4732253

Social Revolution Not Reforms !

Millions of people all around the world are seeking change and a different way of living, demanding justice, peace, and freedom. Our society is beset by a series of interconnected crises. What are the crises facing humanity: The environmental catastrophe and war, global poverty, inequality, terrorism, the displacement of people, and, festering beneath all of these, the socio-economic system under which we all live. Political leaders are incapable of responding to these demands. For lasting change to take place, social prosperity to blossom, we must break free from conditioning. The recognition that humanity is one is crucial in bringing about the much-needed transformation. Solidarity across racial and ethnic divides is growing. Solidarity across social issues scares capitalism. Workers must now regain the militancy and rebuild their popular movements. We have to show the potential of a unified peoples' power. The escalation of militancy should not demand the failed solutions of the past but demand the new economy of the future, socialism, building a cooperative commonwealth of democratised communities and ending economic inequality in our lives.

The Socialist Party does not oppose reforms, some of which, like the NHS, are of benefit to the working class. What we do not do is advocate them because we have something better to advocate.  As socialists, we advocate a world where the tools of production and the world’s wealth are held in common and where all humankind may take goods and services, as needed, for a full and happy life. What we do is point out the nature of the capitalist system and how their benefits are mostly temporary. Medicare is beneficial to the capitalist class also. In Britain, in 1939, when many thousands of young men were drafted for the war, it was found that an alarming percentage were not fit ‘to fight for king and country’ after a decade of depression era unemployment and poor nutrition. Hence the British Health Act of 1948. Many called it ‘The Back To Work Act’, implying, correctly, it was to repair an injured worker so he could return all the sooner to be exploited. As early as 1951, this great reform was in trouble with the addition of some prescription charges (initially free) being added. Now everyone agrees the system is in a mess with the government contracting out services and allowing a parallel private system. So much for the permanence of reforms.

To focus and to see the major problem as the growing gulf between the 1% and the 99% has led to solutions to reduce the gap when it really has to be eliminated altogether. It’s not good enough to simply expect to finish up with less poor and less rich and leave the system that demands that there be a gap in fact. All inequality - economic, political, racial, gender must end. Given that, it must be quite obvious that we haven’t had equality of access to necessary goods and services since the advent of private property. We have a system that is based on inequality - owners and non-owners, employers and employees, capitalists and workers. Inequality has been around a long time but that doesn’t mean it must or will last forever. It must be obvious if we think this through to its logical conclusion that we must simply get rid of private property, the private monopoly of creating and distributing wealth.

 The Socialist Party says a socialist revolution and its ideas would not be confined to one country or region but would spread like a virus throughout the world. National borders may be armed to the teeth and its walls and fences policed 24/7 to keep people in or out, but they cannot contain and stifle ideas, thanks again to modern technology.

There is only one answer, the democratic ownership, and management of the whole system of producing and distributing wealth. This would necessarily mean the abolition of money and the production of goods and services to meet the real needs of the whole community. In such a system, all will contribute according to their abilities and take from the common pool whatever they need. Common ownership of the world’s resources and their use for producing necessary goods and free access for all mankind to all these goods, as needed, will necessarily end inequality. There won’t be owners and classes any more - we will all be owners!That is socialism and it is ready to be implemented now.

Are you ready to work for it? 

Socialist Standard No. 1365 May 2018

• Editorial: Here We Go Again?
• Pathfinders: Killer Apps
• Ethnicity: Sticky Wicket or Slippery Slope?
• NEW PAMPHLET: The Road to Socialism
• Cooking the Books: Pleasing Business Leaders
• Shadow Boxing With the Ghost of Lenin
• Material World: Welcome if You're Rich
• The World Military Situation
• In Response to the Syrian Air Attacks
• Zambia: Corruption and the Origin of a Local Private Capitalist Class
• Dialectic of Power: Leaders and the Led
• Saving Capitalism
• Cooking the Books: Yes, Read Marx
• Proper Gander: A Tale Of Two Cities
• Book Review: 'My Life, Our Times'
• Book Review: 'The Experiment - Georgia’s Forgotten Revolution 1918-1921'
• Book Review: 'Hinterland - America’s New Landscape of Class and Conflict'
• 50 Years Ago: Martin Luther King
• Obituary: Pat Kilgallon
• What is Freedom?
• Rear View
• Cartoon: Free Lunch

May Day - The Spirit of Revolution

Everywhere the working class is confronted by hostile attacks from the ruling class. But this is the day when workers all over the world celebrate. This is the day when we show our strength. This is the day when we demonstrate our global solidarity with fellow-workers. This is the day when workers line up in one body and challenge the ruling class.

 Workers of all countries have shed rivers of blood for a better life and real freedom.  Those who fight for the workers’ cause are subjected by the governments to untold persecution. But in spite of repression, the solidarity of the workers of the world is growing and gaining in strength.   Gone are the days when our fellow-workers slaved submissively, seeing no escape from the state of bondage, no glimmer of light. Socialism has shown the way out.  There is no force on earth that could break the strength of millions of workers united. When the workers' socialist organizations attract an ever greater part of the working class, it will become an even stronger force and will go from victory to victory, ever closer to the great goal — the emancipation of mankind from the present economic and political oppression. The Socialist Party celebrates May Day in the spirit of international fraternity and leaves reforms to the Tory and Labour Parties. We know that the more the workers are organised politically and industrially on a revolutionary basis, the faster and the thicker will reforms be piled up.

The bosses are united and the government stands with the bosses against the workers. Let them know that the workers are united; that the workers will stand by one another; that the workers’ solidarity is international solidarity and that the working class will fight for its emancipation!

We are confident of tomorrow because we trust that the workers throughout the world, will prove wholly capable of building a revolutionary movement. May Day is the symbol of a new era. 

The Meaning of Social Revolution

An Address, delivered for the S. P. of C. in the Labor Temple, Winnipeg,

March 9, 1945, by J. Milne

The word Revolution is a source of fear to a great many people. In their minds, it brings forth a picture of civil strife, bloodshed, and destruction. It portrays the ruin of all the things they love and respect, and the setting up of conditions too horrible even to mention. It is a word that is not pleasantly received.

On the one hand, this attitude arises from a genuine consciousness of economic interests. To the owners of capital, it is not disturbing that dictatorships spread themselves across the earth, leaving economic and intellectual wretchedness in their wake – so long as the interests of capital are not affected thereby. These activities, indeed, are even useful at times, since they give the proper people a firmer grip on the affairs of society by cleansing the minds and purging the ranks of workmen who have become misguided and discontented. To the owners of capital, it is not disturbing that bombs should drop from the skies, that the work of man should be reduced to rubble, and that men, women, and children should be ground into that rubble – if these things happen in the interests of capital. To the owners of capital, it is fitting that insecurity and want should be permanent features of a world of plenty since these are the only things upon which power and wealth can be built. But Revolution! Intolerable!

On the other hand, this attitude towards Revolution arises from a genuine lack of consciousness of economic interests. The workers of the world do not understand wherein their interests lie. They are under the influence of the perverted outlook of the ruling class; and because of this they accept the evils of modern society with tolerance, or resentment turned in the wrong directions, while they face the thought of Revolution with an almost unanimous opposition.

We stand for Revolution. But let it be made clear now that we mean by Revolution, not the things they say we mean, not the tortured existence with which you are now all so familiar, not a change of rulers, masters, or government personnel: we mean a change that will put an end to all these things, a basic change in the economic relationships of society. We mean a Social Revolution – a Socialist Revolution.

Why do we speak of Revolution? There is a reason. What is it? Well, as a starting point, let us ask the question: “Is everyone satisfied with society as it is today?” Even the most optimistic capitalist apologist would be compelled to answer in the negative. There can be no dispute about the fact that discontent is widespread. It is not active, but it does exist. Why are people discontented? Why are you discontented? Ask this question of yourself and of your workmates. Consider the answers. In other parts of the earth, we should be obliged to head the list with the terror brought by bombs and shells; the grief brought by ruined homes; and the horror of living in the midst of death and destruction. Here, we must head the list with the sorrow brought by little items: “Missing”, “Seriously wounded”, “Fallen in the line of duty”. And following these comes the discontent arising from the many restrictions and impositions brought by war, the shortages in housing and in consumers’ goods, the rising price levels, etc.

It may be said that this discontent may be attributed mainly to the war. That may be conceded, but was the war necessary? “Yes”, perhaps you will answer, “It was necessary to destroy Hitler before he destroys us”. But that sort of thing was done once before, was it not? “No”, may come the reply, “but that was because we didn’t do a good enough job of it at that time. We shall not make the same mistake again.” But let us suppose that a better job had been done last time. Would it have prevented the coming of Mussolini? Would it have prevented the rise of Japan? Would there never have been the Hungry Thirties? And let us suppose that, after the war, Germany is completely exterminated. Will that prevent another Hitler from arising somewhere else – perhaps here? Will that prevent another great depression, another great war?

These questions are occurring to workers. Only so far, at present, can they find answers that satisfy them. The other questions remain unanswered, vaguely imprinted on their minds, but looming ever greater as the months go by, bringing with them the dawning thought that life can never be more than an endless circle of want and viciousness, that their periods of greatest access to the products of their own labors can come only at times when millions of their kind are thrown at each other’s throats, only at times of greatest tragedy.

A truly disturbing thought! Yet, where can there be found reason for another thought? Government plans for the post-war world (insofar as these concern the workers) are designed solely to check actual starvation. How can such plans be reconciled with the thought of a world of plenty? The “Big Three” conferences have already produced visible signs of disagreement, and if such signs are apparent in the midst of war, what hope can there be that the defeat of their present opponents will bring an end to such conflicts? Peace and plenty may feature prominently in the words of capital, but there is little room for them in the deeds of capital. They talk of plenty and prepare for scarcity; they talk of peace and prepare for war.

But even though the public figures of our time, the trusted and honored statesmen of today, can and will do nothing to ease the fears and difficulties of mankind, something can be done; and our task is to show what can be done and how it is to be done. This explanation will bring you closer to an understanding of the meaning of Social Revolution.

There is one outstanding problem in modern society. It runs constantly through all the changing fortunes of capitalism, ever present, tending to become ever more intense with the passage of time. And that is the problem of poverty. If we trace back this problem to its breeding ground, we shall find that these other problems which I have mentioned are related to it in such a way that their solution can be effected only through the solution of this fundamental problem. The insecurity of trade depressions, the destructiveness of modern wars, the wretchedness of everyday life under capitalism can be ended only when poverty is ended.

You and I and the great mass of humanity, in order to live, are obliged to work for other people. We have no choice in the matter. The mills, the mines, the factories, all the things that are needed to sustain the life of all the people are owned by only a few of the people – the capitalists. This is a statement that hardly needs to be elaborated upon. It is common knowledge. What is not common knowledge is the fact that here is to be found the source of the great evils of today.

The modern worker works in a plant which he does not own, with machinery which he does not own; and the wealth which he produces, he does not own. What he receives in return is contained in an envelope, or is represented by a check, and is called wages. And his wages are a claim upon the wealth which he has produced. Not all the wealth; only some of it. He does not receive wealth proportionate to the amount which he produces. His wages rise at one time, and fall at another time; then rise and fall again at other times, depending largely upon the conditions of the labor market. His productivity does not fluctuate like that. And if we examine his real wage (i. e., the amount of goods he can obtain for his money wage) over an extended period of time, it will be seen that his standard of life has increased only in a trifling degree (in many cases not at all), and even this increase is of doubtful benefit in view of the greater insecurity of advancing capitalism. Contrasted with the steady and tremendous advance in productivity, there can be room for doubt that the living standards of the workers come a sad-looking second.

Then what becomes of the ever-increasing wealth which the workers produce but do not receive? Into the coffers of capital it goes. Part of it is used for the replacement and expansion of plant and machinery. Part of it, of course, is used to surround the capitalist with massive evidences of wealth and luxury. Part of it used to pay off the politicians, pedagogues, priests, pressmen and such like for their services in keeping the minds of the workers stunted.

But, between the factory and the coffers of capital, a devious line is travelled by the wealth produced by labor. Obviously, the articles produced in a given plant are not in themselves of much use to the plant owner. The manufacturer of shoes can wear only one pair of shoes. It may suit his vanity to reserve for his personal use a dozen pair, or even more; but clearly he cannot use the entire output of a shoe factory. And that, of course, is not his purpose. Neither is it his purpose to provide shoes to those who need shoes. His purpose is to realize profits. So the shoes, which the workers have produced for him, are placed on the market, to be bought by those who need them and have the price to pay for them. And this, as everyone knows, is what happens to the entire out of modern industry.

The workers, as we have already pointed out, are not in a position to buy back all their produce. Only part of it is within their means. Nor can the capitalists themselves consume the balance. They are compelled, therefore, to reach ever farther afield in search of new outlets for their commodities.

But the markets thus created, although always expanding, do not expand at a rate uniform with expanding productivity and production, and every so often great masses of wealth pile up and cause the capitalists to curtail production. Then we have the spectacle of idle and hungry workers trudging the streets in search of work and begging the powers that be for crusts of bread in a land of plenty. Such a condition existed during the Hungry Thirties. And the great surpluses of wealth at that time were never fully disposed of until the present war was well under way.

In the everyday production and circulation of wealth, the capitalists find themselves in need of sources of raw materials, protection in the transport of goods, new markets, etc. They fight amongst themselves over these things. In a given country their differences are settled periodically at the ballot box. On the international field, they frequently resort to violence, and the workers are then called upon to join in the fight for freedom, to save the world for democracy, to defend “our way of life” and such-like nonsense. Such is the true nature of this war.

This has been a brief sketch of the adventuresome and troublesome nature of commodity production. A great deal more could be said on the subject. But perhaps enough has been said at this time to more than strongly suggest that wars are not the result of the wickedness of power-mad dictators, that depressions are not unfortunate natural phenomena, and that poverty is not the result of the failure of individuals to get ahead in the world. Perhaps enough has been said to show that these evils are definitely related, that they are definite features of the economic fabric of society as at present constituted. Perhaps enough has been said to show that they stem directly from the capitalist ownership of the means of life.

A lot of people around us think something ought to be done for the workers. They think wages somehow out to be protected and even increased – reasonably, of course. They think someone ought to take the workers under a protective wing during times of depression, that minimum standards ought to be set up, that boards of this and that ought to be formed, that the government ought to purchase some industries. They think that if something (almost anything, it would seem) was done by a well-meaning government, it would prove beneficial to the downtrodden underdog.

These people (and occupying an honored position within their ranks may be found the Co-operative Commonwealth Federation) forget, or don’t know, that they are not pioneers in this kind of activity, that they are simply the current representatives of a long line of misinformed warriors who have been baying at the moon for generations. Two great modern monuments provide adequate testimony to the success of their efforts: the Great Depression of the Hungry Thirties and the Great Catastrophe of the Bloody Forties.

Capitalism reminds one of the German workers back in the days of secret rearmament in Germany. He worked in a factory that produced parts for baby carriages. His wife was to have a baby, so he naturally had to carry home the necessary parts. He complained bitterly afterwards because, no matter how he assembled the parts, the results was always the same – a machine gun.

Capitalism is like that. No matter what you do to it, it reacts in the same way. Wrap yourself up in capitalism, sew up its rips and tears, call it by some other name, and it will still be a poor shelter from the wind.

The solution to the problem is Revolution – Social Revolution. And by this we mean a new system of society, a system in which there will be neither private nor government ownership of the means for producing and distributing wealth, a system in which all these things will be owned in common by all the people, where wealth will be produced for no other purpose than to satisfy human needs. We do not mean a condition of chaos, anarchy, and bloodshed. We have these things now. We mean a system in which peace, happiness, and freedom for the mass of the people will have a real meaning for the first time in history. We mean a system of society in which poverty, wars, insecurity and all the evils existing and arising from the economic nature of capitalism will be ended, once and for all time.

Is there any reason why such a state of affairs ought not to be introduced? For thousands of years the slaves of society, with brains and brawn and sweat and blood, have toiled to develop and erect the magnificent structure that is the modern means for producing the needs of mankind. Who can stand up and state bluntly that only the capitalist class may own these means and benefit from their operation? Who can stand up and state bluntly that the workers of the world should continue to live in hovels and feed on swill and shower the greatness of their ever-expanding abilities on the lap of a useless parasite class?

Is there any reason why the state of affairs which we propose cannot be introduced? The workers feed and clothe and fight for the capitalist class. They wait on them hand and foot and carry them around on their backs from the cradle to the grave. When they decide that they will no longer engage in such foolishness, what power on earth is great enough to prevent them from asserting their will?

The day is coming when the workers of the world will rise from their knees, conscious of their own interests, their own strength, their own destiny. The day is coming when the workers of the world will proceed about the task of building society anew. How soon that day will come depends on how soon is built into an overwhelming force the movement striving for its attainment. Today that movement is small, but its growth is the growth of the working class will to power. It is not a movement of banners and bunting, of fanfares and parades. Neither fireworks nor heroics feature its activities. But it is the greatest movement ever undertaken by man. And those who are its members are sure of their position, proud of their position, and certain that every step they take is a step forward. They know where they are going and they know how to get there.

We invite you to join us. We offer you freedom from the mental enslavement of class society. We offer you the companionship of men and women who are not carried away by the sham, the hypocrisy, the lies of a decadent ruling class. Most of all, we offer you an opportunity to roll up your sleeves and take part in the activities of the one movement worthwhile – the movement for Social Revolution.

Capitalism Versus the Environment

Year in and year out we release millions of tonnes of hothouse gases into the atmosphere. Tropical forests are destroyed and farm-land seriously degraded.  These are global changes which involve incredible risks. Some of the dangers are understood but nobody knows and nobody can predict the critical point when any combination of such changes might produce a sequence of further rapid changes which would be catastrophic from a human point of view. Obviously, we share the concern of the environmentalists about the importance of the problem, and we too want a planet where we do not damage the environment. The first thing we've got to do is identify the cause of the problem and here the Socialist Party begins to part company with most ecologists. If one reads the literature from the likes of Friends of the Earth and others, you'll notice that they never truly identify the cause of the problem. Global warming and climate change result from the economic limitations of a system that puts privileged class interests before the needs of the community. The cause is capitalism which puts profit before needs and which therefore puts profit before the protection of the environment. The problem is out of control because the economic constraints of the system prevent the problems being solved. Rational resolutions to environmental destruction are impossible in the mad world of capitalism. 

It must be clear that a set of problems which are global in scale, affecting populations across the entire planet, can only be effectively tackled by cooperation between all peoples. You can't have the world divided up between rival capitalist states — all driven by economic competition both within their boundaries and between each other and all driven by the economic pressures of profit and class interests, with a good many of them at actual war with each other — and expect to be in a position to solve the problems of the global environment. Effective action has got to be based on world cooperation. we have to be in a position of control. In other words, we must be in a position of being able to make democratic decisions about what must be done and must be free to take the necessary action, using the available means without any economic constraints. It is surely self-evident that unless we have cooperation and control we are never going to begin to solve the problem and that we cannot get cooperation within capitalism.

The various international conferences on climate change have failed to make any significant progress and it could be said that they are mere forums for empty rhetoric, intended to put a public relations gloss on government inaction. However, the fact that these are international discussions does recognise one important thing. They accept that the problems are global and that global consensus is required for action on a global scale. What dooms them to failure is the fact that they take place in a world that is divided into nation-states which are in economic competition with each other. This makes global consensus impossible and rules out any effective global action. The pressures to keep down costs and protect profits means that the technology for reducing pollution is either ignored or applied in a minimal token way. With all people united about their shared interests, the division of the world into rival capitalist states will be replaced by a democratic administration organised on a world, regional and local levels. The global nature of the problem would surely require a world energy organisation and we can anticipate that its functions could include bringing together technical experts and planners from across the world and setting up research projects. This research would not be constrained by costs and it would not be tainted by commercial or nationalistic interests. Nor would it be shrouded in secrecy or geared to national security. So, in a completely open society, such a world energy organisation would make available all the most up-to-date information on the problems of pollution together with the various technical options for acting on them. Such information would be the basis on which democratic decisions would be made.

To get cooperation we first have to get rid of the present system which is based on economic competition. We need to establish a system based instead on common ownership, a world socialist cooperative commonwealth, where all means of producing and distributing goods and all productive resources are held in common by the whole community. This means the end of the wages system through which workers are exploited for profit and the end of producing goods for sale so as to get that profit. It means people living and working in the community in a relationship of direct cooperation with each other, producing the goods and running the services that we need. This is a way of organising the community where the use of money will be entirely redundant. If we establish common ownership, if we set up a society which is run solely for human needs as a result of people cooperating together, we are at fast in a position where we can control our actions. Under capitalism, we are at the mercy of economic forces that nobody can control. Get rid of these economic forces and we are at last in a position to make democratic decisions about how best to use production for the benefit of the community. With the establishment of socialism, we will throw off the economic shackles of the profit system and break through into the freedom to use all our talents, skills and energies to solve problems through co-operation.

The object of the Socialist Party is to create relationships of co-operation between all people and to solve the problems caused by capitalist society. Initially, this will involve a commitment to great world projects requiring a new democratic administration, new institutions, and expanded production. However, we can also anticipate that in a situation where much of this great work has been accomplished there could be an eventual fall in production. This suggests the possibility of a sustainable, "steady-state" society which could work within the natural systems of the environment in a non-destructive way. When te Socialist Party speaks of a stable, sustainable society we do not mean a static society in which there is no development. On the contrary, when liberated from the profit motive of corporate research and the military machines of capitalist states, science will flourish and will serve the interests of all people. Nor do we suggest that new science will not result in new technology. The urgent need for care of the environment will be just one field where research and new technology would be given priority. However, we should also recognise that the abolition of all the economic constraints imposed by the market system on the use of labour will bring enormously increased powers of production. In socialism it will be possible to produce vast amounts of goods. It is in the light of this fact that people in socialism would have to ask if it makes sense to go on and on producing whilst using up the planet's resources or whether there should be voluntary limits to consumption and an eventual scaling down of productive activity. The Socialist Party do not presume to lay down in advance what decisions will be made in socialism we can set out a possible way of achieving an eventual zero growth society operating in a stable and ecologically benign way. This could be achieved in three main phases. First, there would have to be emergency action to relieve the worst problems of food shortages, health care, and housing which affect billions of people throughout the world. Secondly, longer-term action to construct means of production and infrastructures such as transport systems for the supply of permanent housing and durable consumption goods. These could be designed in line with conservation principles, which means they would be made to last for a long time, using materials that where possible could be re-cycled and would require minimum maintenance. Thirdly, with these objectives achieved there could be an eventual fall in production, and society could move into a stable mode. This would achieve a rhythm of daily production in line with daily needs with no significant growth. On this basis, the world community could reconcile two great needs, the need to live in material well being whilst looking after the planet which is our shared home in space. Seen solely from a technical point of view there is no doubt many ways in which the damage caused by pollution could be reduced with different uses of labour. But before any of these can become real options on which communities can freely make democratic decisions, labour itself must first be liberated. Labour must enjoy its own freedom outside the present enclosed system of commodity exchange in which it is confined to its function of profit making and the accumulation of capital.

The idea of a zero growth, sustainable society is not new and has been put forward by the Green movement. But whilst many of the declared aims of the Greens appear to be desirable these are contradicted by a fatal flaw in their policies. They stand for the continuation of the market system. The environmentalist activists aim to retain the market system in which goods are produced for sale at a profit. This must mean the continuation of the capitalist system which is the cause of the problems of pollution in the first place. Those in the environmentalist movement has never been able to answer the question which is how it can achieve a zero growth, sustainable society whilst retaining a market system which includes an irresistible, built in pressure to increase sales for profit and where if sales collapse, society tends to break down in recession, unemployment, and financial crisis. The only way in which the aims of the Greens could be achieved is through socialism. Not even in the most optimistic dreams of defenders of the free market will the "care of the environment" ever be made to equal "accumulation of capital". 

UBI or Not?

In Scotland, the Green Party has proposed a model of UBI which could get close to being fiscally neutral. This would see much of the existing welfare system replaced by a payment of £5,200 per year for adults and £2,600 for children, alongside significant reform the tax system. In this scenario, personal allowances would be removed and combined tax and NI rates increased for all.

Citing security in the labour market as a key reason for the policy proposal, this model has been welcomed by proponents of UBI. However, at £400 a month for adults while also removing almost all the welfare state, it is unlikely to buy much economic freedom for those on low incomes or insecure and exploitative employment contracts. In reality some would see their incomes drop. For instance, in Scotland, lone parents would see their monthly earnings fall by around £300 a month.

What’s more, a model of UBI paid at this level would also have notable impacts on rates of relative poverty. Were this model introduced in the UK as a whole, it would also raise relative child poverty by 17%, placing a further 750,000 children into households who earn below 60% of the median income. This is because while it would raise the incomes of those earning the least, it would also raise incomes for all but the highest income decile, lifting the poverty line higher.

Research commissioned by the Joseph Rowntree Foundation has similarly found that UBI schemes increase relative poverty for working-age adults, children, and pensioners. The introduction of a UBI, according to their modelling, could see the number of children in poverty rise by up to 60%.

Increasing the incomes of those at the bottom of the distribution is imperative. This is demonstrated clearly by the rise of food banks deprivation and income crisis in the UK since 2010, which is a direct result of government policy choices. However, using a UBI to achieve this, at the expense of say increases or reforms to Universal Credit and a more generous and less conditional unemployment benefit, comes at the cost of addressing, and in fact exacerbating, relative poverty. The pursuit of a fiscally neutral UBI has led to a series of proposals which, if implemented, would do little to raise the material circumstance of those in poverty nor provide sufficient additional power in the labour market. 

Taken from here

The Socialist Party is in favour of a society of common ownership and democratic control where people wouldn't have "incomes" but have free access to what they needed. The Socialist Party declares that most proposals for a UBI are merely just tax reformism and a reform of the poor law.

Advocating a New Society

Capitalism has almost engulfed the whole world. Every nation is involved in world trade and cannot escape the influence of international power politics, with its alliances and war preparations. Technical innovation goes on apace, augmenting military might, intensifying the labour process and maximising the exploitation of the worker. This drive for greater technical efficiency is basic to capitalism's insatiable thirst for profits; humanity's real needs are not considered. Science serves the ends of the capitalist system. It serves the military might of nations. It serves industrial efficiency not by satisfying community needs, but by intensifying the exploitation of the working class. Years ago Western workers, the Asian peasants and tribal Africans were living in different worlds. Today we live very similar lives. The same social problems are increasingly imposing themselves upon us. We are all cogs in the machinery of capitalism, and are exploited in the same way. Our diets and our language may differ, but the workers day-to-day material problems are essentially the same. Capitalism cannot avoid a continuing ferment of discontent, albeit generally expressed in negative ways, through hate, violence, cynicism and even despair. Politicians display little or no vision in a world dominated by corporate power, ignorance, denial, and greed. The capitalist economy treats natural resources as a business, undermining the life-support systems of our planet. The entire political and economic system of capitalism is inherently unstable Capitalist production is enclosed within an exchange economy. It does expand, but only as the self-expansion of capital takes place through the exploitation of the working class—through the use of wage labour. Defenders of the market system claim that the cost/price factors, through which it operates. enable modern production to be organised in a rational manner, that without the market modern production would break down and could not carry on in a practical way. Experience shows that it is precisely the operation of the market which constrains and dislocates modern production. It is only by first abolishing the market system that the useful structure of modern production could become free to be run in a practical way, directly for human needs. Without the market, production could be operated more efficiently in direct line with human needs. This could avoid all the present wasteful features. Whereas "oversupply" of the material in relation to the capacity of the market for sales at a profit involves a denial of human needs, in socialism the position of oversupply would not be reached until human needs had been met. However, it should be noted that behind the madness of the market, there are useful administrative structures which could provide ready-made organisation for the operation of production solely for use.

With socialism, on the basis of common ownership, the producers' social existence is formed by direct relationships of co-operative activity about mutual needs. The co-ordination of the world division of labour for production for use can be achieved by modern information technology without the need for centralised control. A complete monitoring of world production is now technically possible at any level throughout the entire system. With a shared and equal interest between all people in world production, control can be maintained by a system of decentralised co-operation. Centralised State control is hostile to democracy. The present position whereby governments impose their decisions on the wider population will have to be replaced by a system of decision-making and action where the decisions flow from the broadest social base to make up the democratic view of the community. This is the reverse of the present system of centralised state control, and it is what is meant in the socialist object by democratic control, by and in the interests of the whole community. Production for use and democratic control is adaptable. Different productive activities can be organised in different ways according to practicality and according to the importance of the activity as it affects the whole community. All sorts of spontaneous activities could arise in different local communities.

A great deal of discussion about socialism centres on how needs will be determined in the absence of markets, money and prices. How will decisions be made about production? Needs are socially given by the nature of existing problems. The objective of socialism is to organise society directly for human needs and therefore support for socialism must be on the basis that we take over the means of production and resources, and then concentrate the priorities of social action on the areas of greatest human need.  Socialism will abolish all economic relationships of exchange.  The capitalist exchange relationships between commodities themselves, including the human commodity, labour power, will be replaced by a direct relationship in the line of productive activity; items of wealth, and human need. This direct relationship of wealth to need replaces the capitalist relationship between things. The price mechanism which transmits an economic message throughout capitalist production, to do with cheapness and competitive, profit-making success, will be replaced in socialism with a direct relationship of production to human needs. Socialism will enjoy the flexibility to combine different methods of production where this might be considered necessary by the community. It will deploy all its resources more freely according to practicality and desirability regardless of possibly different rates of working efficiency. Socialism will enjoy more people available for the production of useful wealth; without the limits of market capacity it will enjoy greater use of production methods; without price competition it will enjoy wider selection of production methods; with the ending of national barriers it will enjoy a more rational deployment of world resources; and without capital investment it will enjoy greater adaptability of social production. Socialism will combine all these practical advantages with all the criteria for the selection of production methods according to need, such as material necessity, the enjoyment of work, safety, care of the environment, conservation.

The only remaining barriers against a system of integrated world production are the class relations of capitalism, the profit motive, and the political division of the world into rival capitalist nations.