Arouse, ye slaves!

We declare that the Socialist Party have earned the right to be listened to, for of all sections of the working-class movement we have been true, whilst the concept of socialism has been distorted and used as a cover to march our class from one swamp to another, their labour-power bought and sold like merchandise, their children snobbishly belittled. We still propagate that you, our fellow-workers must abolish the wages system, must fashion a society to your needs, a class-free society, where mankind passes from the realm of necessity to the realm of freedom.

 The Left has kept the workers' attention fixed upon questions of taxation, banking reform, nationalisation, and a thousand and one other things in which the remedies proposed would bring no appreciable improvement in the general position of the workers. The idea of a living wage regulation is well over a century old but surely that would be an issue worth fighting on? "Socialism" for the Left is a vast and complicated system of state ownership, in which nationalised banks, money, and other trading impedimenta would flourish in a "step by step" advance to socialism where wealth produced, distributed, and enjoyed communally, without the intervention of money, credit instruments or any of the other rubbish essential to a trading world. First of all we take it that, broadly-speaking, a living wage means a wage on which people could live with a certain amount of comfort: pay the average rent demanded, get a sufficiency of nourishing food, have the small luxuries necessary to make life worth living, be able to give their children the necessary education and leisure, and be able to take an annual holiday to freshen and rebuild a jaded physique. Once such a wage was conceded the employers would immediately receive an extra impetus to look around for ways and means to lower production costs. Machinery that low wages now render unnecessary would be introduced, fresh machinery invented, waste as far as possible eliminated, industries amalgamated to cut out waste connected with competition. The result of this process (a process that is always going on but receives an extra push now and again) would be a reduction in the numbers of workers employed and an increase in the already huge quantity of unemployed. A small group of workers would be more comfortable at the expense of greater misery for the mass. In other words attempts at bettering the conditions of the workers, while retaining the wage system, act, as a rule, as incentives to the capitalists to lower production costs by methods that worsen the general conditions of the workers. The only, and the simple, solution is the introduction of socialism

Many on the Left advocate international co-operation within the framework of capitalism. The Socialist Party knows that such an achievement impossible. The nationalistic capitalism of any particular country is composed of the capitalist activities of individual capitalists or groups of capitalists within that country. The fierce competition between capitalists compels them to secure as great an amount as possible of commodities, and to find ever-increasing markets for the transforming of these commodities into cash. Without such markets, the surplus value produced by the workers could not be converted into profits. Within each capitalist country, the sum total of this production and scrambling for markets is identified as the capitalism of the country from which it emanates.

The whole of the exploiting of labour power and the grabbing of markets by, for example, American, German, or British capitalists, is recognised as American, German, or British capitalism. Thus we see that behind the separate entities of American, German, or British capitalism (or whatever nationalist capitalism it be) are individual capitalists who must ever maintain competitive equality or supremacy—or be ousted from their privileged positions as capitalists.

The expansion of individual capitalism within a country, therefore, brings an expansion of that particular country's capitalism. his law prevails in all capitalist countries with the result that the capitalism of such nations finds itself in fierce competition with the capitalism of other nations. As long as we live in a society wherein there exists commodity production, and the urgent capitalist need to sell widely the commodities produced, there can be no possibility of removing a world-wide scramble for markets. Many may indeed be sincere in seeking of a New Order that has no place for market-grabbing, but they have failed to learn that this can only be done by establishing a social system in which commodity production and commodity selling cannot exist.

Modern nationalism manifests itself as the political expression of a rising capitalist class when it considers itself grown up and able to run its industries, banks, etc., without the aid of "foreign" capitalism. This enables the native capitalists to enjoy all the profits instead of sharing it. For any socialist, it is his or her duty to oppose the wars of the ruling class of one nation with the ruling class of another and to refuse to participate in them. Is the Britain of the ruling class worth defending by the workers? Has the worker to-day – a wage-slave earning but a bare subsistence wage – anything to fight for? As it is the country is being conquered by the operations of the international capitalist. The British worker is to-day the employee of a multinational whose shareholders is global.

Were China to conquer India or France to conquer Britain, we would be ruled by no more alien class than rules us to-day. Our condition is such that we have no guarantee from week to week to earn our livelihood. Millions of us are living in a state of semi-starvation, living in always changing. In the slum districts the conditions are such that crime is at a premium, and virtuous living at a discount, so much so indeed that it is a constant surprise that the results of these conditions are so good. The worker to-day has nothing to fight for. The interests of the master class are not our interests. National prestige is not our prestige but is used to force from other nations commercial treaties and conditions which in the end prove adverse to him.

What the socialist has to realise clearly is that the interests of our fellow workers in other lands are nearer to his than are those of the master in our own country. The bonds which bind worker with worker, irrespective of nationality, are those of class solidarity. From the capitalist-class of every country, the worker is divided by a gulf of class antagonism which can be bridged only by the absorption of the capitalist-class in the working class, the result of the coming social revolution.

When the capitalist-class fully realises that they can no longer depend upon the working-class, when they find that the workers have at last come to understand their class position and that they have no reason for fighting in their master’s interests against those with whom we hold no personal quarrel, he, the capitalist, will see that it is impossible to appeal to nationalist prestige, to patriotism, and all the rest of the phrases used of old, and then it will be impossible to make war in so light a spirit, or to raise questions likely to create a tension between the ruling class of different nations. It is for the worker to see that his or her position demands that he or she should fight only for class emancipation and that nothing, internal reform or national strife, should draw themselves away from the determination to fight for the realisation of the socialist society.

WORKERS OF ALL COUNTRIES UNITE! YOU HAVE NOTHING TO LOSE BUT YOUR CHAINS! YOU HAVE A WORLD TO WIN.

Can't Cope With Orgy Of Crime

Regular readers of this column will know that Toronto has become a city plagued by gang warfare. In some ways it resembles Chicago of the 1920's. There is a shooting nearly every day; gang warfare is open and blatant; whereas in Chicago it was over alcohol, in Toronto it's narcotics. 

The major difference being that Toronto's police and politicians are not on any mobsters payroll, though since they cannot cope with the prevailing orgy of crime it doesn't mean much. If someone is the target of a killing, anyone in his immediate vicinity could be shot as his enemies spray bullets at random. 

Such was the case on June 16 when two girls ages 5 and 9 were shot and wounded in a playground in the Toronto suburb of Scarborough, leaving a whole city shocked and disgusted. 

When a society is in the process of breaking down it makes a lot of sense to replace it with one that won't.

For socialism, 
Steve, Mehmet, John & contributing members of the SPC.

The Spirit of Revolution

 We often hear Parliamentary electoral activity derided and often does not find much favour among the so-called militants of the working-class movement. One of the illusions on which the master class depends for their retention of power is that the State is an independent, neutral body mediating impartially between the different sections of society. The capitalist class are neither all-powerful nor such fools as to be caught napping by minorities. Our weakness is their strength. While but a small proportion of the working-class understand their slave position in society, and are organised for the purpose of ending it, the capitalist class are strong. But when the working class wakes up to the fact that their masters live in riotous luxury on the proceeds of their, the workers', exploitation, and manifest a determination to end the system, the vaunted power of the capitalist class will melt and vanish like margarine in the Summer sun.

Capitalism is a system of society in which goods are produced in the first place solely for profit. A few people, the master class, own and control the land, factories, mines and everything which is used to produce wealth. The mass of the people, the workers, are propertyless and have to work for a master in order to get enough money to buy back from the owners the number of goods which their earnings will cover. They are paid just enough to enable them to live according to the standard of living in which it has pleased God, etc. Thus a clerk’s standard of comfort is different from a manager’s, and from a farm labourer’s; but all are workers, and all must sell their labour power in order to live. Even when the worker is in work he must be constantly fighting against reductions in pay. The “dole” is about the lowest amount that can be paid to a person to keep him alive, and employed workers must always be on the alert against being pushed nearer to that amount. Hence, even when a job is obtained it does not mean freedom from worry and anxiety. Machinery has been developed to such an extent that goods can be produced much faster and in considerably greater quantities than they were years ago when practically every available worker was used. The workers who have jobs have only sufficient to purchase little more than the actual necessities of life, and the unemployed have considerably less, so that their spending power is restricted, and we have the ridiculous position arising of millions of commodities having been produced which cannot be sold because millions of people haven’t sufficient money to buy them. Quantities of goods which people need are destroyed so as not to flood the market. Factories remain idle when there are men and women willing and anxious to work them, and prating fools preach false doctrines ot economy when there is an abundance of everything. The economic evils of to-day are unnecessary, and those who talk of reforms, and expedients for alleviating those evils are either babes or charlatans.

There is not one reform or measure, free trade or protectionism, tariffs or taxes, shorter hours or longer hours, that will get the workers out of their main difficulty or make capitalism a satisfactory system. The conditions are ripe for a change, and all that is lacking is the workers' understanding of the position and their determination to alter it. Socialism, the common ownership of the means and instruments for producing everything we need, is the only solution to the economic ills, and many others which are the outcome of these deeper troubles and which beset us on all sides. Socialism can only be brought about by socialists, and our job in this Party is to make socialists, so that we may put an end to this poverty in the midst of plenty and get the very best out of the few years of life that is our heritage in the aeons of time that have gone and are yet to come.

An endless job for Labour Party historians is the expunging of inconvenient memories, of which their party has more than the most industrious of harlots. Some memories are successfully blamed upon the treachery of its party-leaders and the other villains. Time, and actual experience of nationalisation at work have had a savage revenge on the defeatists who propagated the original theory that the way to get Socialism was to organise and fight for something else. The predominant leaders of the Labour Party know that an electoral campaign seeking a mandate to nationalise all industries would bring them certain defeat. Nationalisation is an irrelevance to capitalists and workers alike; it has little bearing on the actual problems facing British capitalism and none at all on the position of the workers. The personalities of politicians — whether they are clever or stupid, honest of corrupt — are of little account. Capitalism deals with them all in the same way.  Nobody should conclude from this that the answer is another sort of government, composed of more stable personalities or sober sentiments. For capitalism does not discriminate in what or who it destroys; its history is studded with politicians who became discredited in their efforts to deceive the rest of us that this is a benign, caring, humane society. The working class, who at elections vote to continue the experience that life under capitalism is a daily struggle, understand so little of their class position and interests that they turn from one discredited futility to the other—then back again.

Many of them are now deceived into thinking that the Labour Party offers something radically different from the outworn nostrums of the Tory party. What Labour offers is no more than a rehash of the programmes and the personalities. There is no reason to believe that they will succeed where the others have failed; their character is basically the same — a prescription for failure, despair and defeat. Capitalism grinds on.

Rivalry, or competition as it is called, is the keynote of Capitalism. Prosper yourself and ruin your rival is its economic creed. Man struggles with man for job, firm struggles with firm for markets, and nation struggles with nation for commercial influence. When the struggle becomes acute and nation is opposed to nation, then follows war; one competitive nation seeks to impose its will upon another competitive nation. The machinery of murder piled up during the years of peace is then used for the purpose for which it was designed. The Socialist Party remedy is the abolition of competition, national and international, and the substitution of co-operation. We ask all intelligent people to read our literature, study our suggestions for re-organising society, and take a definite hand in the ordering of things. Cease to be led up the blind alleys of reform, cease to be humbugged by superficial thinking, cease to be the plaything of specious appeals to the emotions. Rivalry under capitalism means death and ruin to the weakest. Socialism means the co-operation of all men, without distinction of race or colour, to use this earth as a common store-house, owned in common and worked for the common good. War is the normal outcome of capitalism. In it the workers have nothing to lose but their lives and nothing to gain but a change of masters, a continuance of their slavery, or an intensification of their poverty. If fighting could achieve anything socialism would be the one thing worth fighting for. Has it not been said, you have nothing to lose but your chains, you have a world to win.


 There is no such thing as a good despotism. Who are dubbed good despots are viler than bad ones, for without making for stable or genuine progress, they create a flabby, servile people, devoid of initiative or activity. No permanent progress can be made except by improving the common human material. Democracy is the only possible method of preventing a single “great” man from becoming, by a union of talent and opportunity and ambition, a good or bad despot, a terrible source of oppression. But even despots can only reign long when they correctly represent the interests of a dominant class. Socialism is the only possible method of preventing a class from monopolising the great machinery of wealth production, and perverting science and the arts to their own ends. And socialism would not eliminate genius. It would merely prevent humans of genius and those super-privileged men of talent whom we have often mistaken for such, using any class as a milch cow from which to extract “economic rent." 

The Socialist Cause

Let it be said unequivocally that world socialism will not arise naturally “bit-by-bit” through the policies of parties elected on a programme of reforming capitalism. It will only be introduced when the majority of people turn their backs on the inevitably vain attempts of the capitalist parties to tinker with the present system and cast votes for a world of real democracy, real equality and real cooperative human activity. The immediate task of the workers is to study the structure and origin of capitalism, and to learn that there are no shortcuts to emancipation ; that the solution of the problem of poverty in every industry and in every continent is the same—the abolition of the system of society which requires that the great majority shall be poor in order that a favoured few may live idle and luxurious lives.

Interest, dividends, and profits can only be procured by robbing the workers of the wealth they alone have produced. It, therefore, cannot be a question as to whether the robbery is carried out under “good” or “bad” conditions. The workers’ only concern should be how to end the robbery.  With the increasing corporate capitalism there is an increasing economy in the production of wealth by the elimination of waste and useless labour, an introduction of new and larger machinery and the increasing application of scientific discoveries to industry. This results in fewer workers being required to produce a given quantity of wealth, or a larger amount being produced by the same number in the same time as were employed before. The increase in the number of workers rendered relatively redundant by these means will bring home to the workers themselves the absurdity of imagining that the capitalist could—if he would or would if he could—alter things in any material way while allowing the present basis to remain. Only by altering the system, by overthrowing and abolishing the capitalist class and establishing socialism in its stead can the workers get rid of the bad conditions they exist under to-day.

The capitalist or employing class lives by exploiting the workers; this means that out of the whole product of their labour the workers receive only a part, and not a large part. Speaking generally, they get sufficient to enable them to work and to bring children into the world who will carry on when they are worn out—just like horses, with the one great difference that a horse costs money and must be fed and tended even when temporarily not required to work, while men cost nothing and can be stood off when work is slack, because their employer is under no obligation to keep them, and knows that they can be replaced at any time. In any industry, therefore, the employers are primarily interested in the exploitation of their own employees. Their interests are served by having production as high, and wages as low, as possible, even to the extent of injuring the health of the workers. An individual employer does not have to consider the health and fitness of future generations, and in consequence physical deterioration has been the lot of the workers in every land under the present system of society.

As a class, the workers are not concerned with taxation under capitalism. Out of the total wealth, which they produce by applying their labour power to the materials given by nature, they receive on an average about enough to keep them in the working condition that the masters' interests demand. Obviously, they have no margin left over out of which to pay either taxes or economic rent. It is thus clear that it is the masters who must pay these expenses in the form of rates and taxes, and it is they who would obtain any benefit that might result from the application of "economic rent" to these expenses. The method might not please the section of the master class who are solely, or mainly, landholders, but it would undoubtedly be beneficial to the industrial or commercial capitalists and is really the ideal capitalist form of taxation.

The workers suffer when they strike, but this doesn't matter in the least to their employers if it were not for the fact that the latter suffer too. The employers have the State behind them and all the chances are in their favour, but even if they were certain of victory they would still prefer a less expensive way of settling disputes. A stoppage of work means no profits, idle machinery, unfulfilled contracts, and the loss of markets to home and foreign competitors.

The ability of the workers at any given time to get a larger share of what they produce depends, not upon the eloquence of their representatives, but on their powers to demand it. A whole intellectual armoury of moral arguments will fail to convince an employer of the justice of a claim if the labour market is overcrowded. If he knows that there are a dozen men willing to take the place of each of his employees for the same or less wages, he will also know that he can reduce wages with impunity. Well organised workers will take advantage of every favourable opportunity to get higher wages, and will fight to prevent any reduction. 

Where find the remedy, then but in the organisation of productive forces, not privately for profit, but socially, to the sole end of furnishing everything of use and delight which the heart of man can desire? This is Socialism, and within it will be room for all to enter the field of labour. Then every achievement of mind and arm will be a gain to us, and a part in the enjoyment of that rich store will be our common right.

Let each person, therefore, see in every fellow-worker, skilled or unskilled, man or woman, one bound with the same chain; whose emancipation is to be won, not at the price of his or her own, but with and in his or her own. Together let them hasten the inevitable end of capitalism and build in its place the socialist commonwealth.

The Most Compassionate Suggestion Of All

Justin Trudeau said recently he will apologize for the Canadian government's refusal in 1939 to allow the Jewish refugees aboard the ship, St.Louis, to enter Canada. 

Trudeau said nothing about why his government won't allow refugees in from Syria, Sudan, Ethiopia, Myanmar and the Congo, who are also fleeing from Genocide. Canada is a world leader in developing and using methods of keeping refugees out, such as visa requirements, electronic travel authorizations, carrier sanctions migration officers posted abroad, working with other governments to detect and stop migration networks and the Canada-U.S. Safe Third Country Agreement. 

Nor has Trudeau said anything about the laws his government does not abolish that prescribe lengthy prison sentences for transporting asylum seekers into Canada. 

That all this is blatant hypocrisy isn't the point. If it were in the interests of Canadian capitalism to allow refugees in then Trudeau certainly would. 

We Socialists do not say, ''let them in'', or, ''keep them out'', because, and again, that isn't the point. We are not going to be drawn into taking sides in any of the stupid and inhumane problems that capitalism causes. 

Nor do we lack compassion, in fact, we urge the most compassionate suggestion of all which is the abolition of the system that causes refugee crises in the first place.

For socialism, 
Steve, Mehmet, John & contributing members of the SPC.

Summer School 2018 Updates

 

Capitalism is a society of inequalities, in how both wealth and power are distributed. These inequalities have often affected women more adversely than men, and campaigns for women’s rights have been ongoing for over a century. But the debate around gender equality is no longer just about differences in wages or opportunities. Allegations of sexual harassment and abuse in Parliament and the entertainment industry especially have highlighted how some men have exercised their power. Also, the debate has broadened due to increased awareness of issues affecting transgender people, many of whom have felt marginalised.

How should socialists respond to the new prominence given to gender politics? What does gender inequality tell us about capitalist society, especially how it shapes gender roles? And how does the issue impact upon revolutionary politics? The Socialist Party argues that sexism and misogyny are expressions of how capitalism is inherently divisive and unequal. So, the solution is to address these problems at their source, by uniting to replace capitalism with a society based on equality and freedom.

Our weekend of talks and discussion will examine how gender issues relate to wider society and to revolutionary politics.

Full residential cost (including accommodation and meals Friday evening to Sunday afternoon) is £100

The concessionary rate is £50

 Day visitors are welcome, but please book in advance.

Details about the venue:

Fircroft College of Adult Education, 
1018 Bristol Road, Selly Oak, 
Birmingham, B29 6LH

Location and travel (http://fircroft.ac.uk/about-us/location/) directions

E-mail enquiries should be sent to spgbschool@yahoo.co.uk. To book a place send a cheque (payable to the Socialist Party of Great Britain) with your contact details to

Summer School,
The Socialist Party, 
52 Clapham High Street, 
London, SW4 7UN.

Scheduled talks so far include:

Lorna Stevens and Paddy Shannon present...

'INSIDE THE MATRIX'
This talk will argue against the premise that oppression is simply the product of class struggle and that feminism can be dismissed as identity politics which distract from the real issue. Feminism and socialism are not either/or, positions. An understanding of class, patriarchy and intersectionality is crucial to the challenge of establishing a world based on socialist principles.

Bill Martin will present...

'EQUAL WORK FOR EQUAL VALUE?'
This talk will look at the relevance of value, and the labour theory of value to discussions around the gender pay gap in the workplace. It will look at value as a story told to lay claim to the output of society, and will relate that to Utopian visions of women and womanhood. It will argue that that value is not a value-free idea, but in fact a deliberate move in the class struggle to enforce the power of the capitalist class. Along the way, this talk will take in how the working class is exploited, and how this exploitation contains within itself the end of capitalist values. Finally, it will suggest that the struggle over equal wages contains within itself the drive toward the abolition of the wages system itself.

Film showing: 'Did Gender Egalitarianism Make Us Human?' by Camilla Power (Senior lecturer in Anthropology at the University of East London)

Introduced by Carla Dee and Richard Field, with discussion afterwards.

Mike Foster will present...

'SEX AND POWER'

Glasgow's Poverty

Glasgow has suffered the worst poverty in the UK for almost half a century, according to a new study. Through the seventies with power cuts, strikes and three day weeks, the rising unemployment of the eighties under Margaret Thatcher, then the regeneration of Glasgow in the nineties, Labour Governments of Blair and Brown and right through to the Tory austerity of the last decade, Glasgow’s poorest areas have come out consistently the worst for deprivation. Researchers have analysed deprivation statistics across the UK from every census between 1971 and 2011 and found the ten most deprived areas over the period are all in Glasgow.

While the study found large increases in deprivation in large English cities, including London, Liverpool, and Birmingham, specific parts of Glasgow fared worst. The ten most deprived areas, measuring one square kilometre over the period were in seven council wards in Glasgow. Three were in Calton, two in North East, and one each in Govan, Canal, Baillieston, Springburn and Drumchapel/Anniesland.

Latest child poverty statistics for 2016 showed that Glasgow had a much higher rate than the rest of Scotland with 34% of children in poverty, but in the most deprived areas this increased to almost 60% of all children. Other studies show that since 2011 the situation has not improved.

The Scottish Index of Multiple Deprivation shows 190,000 Glaswegians almost one-third of the population live in the 10% most deprived areas in Scotland.

And almost half of Glasgow’s people, 283,000 people, reside in the 20% of most deprived areas in Scotland.

http://www.eveningtimes.co.uk/news/16343650.glasgow-worst-in-uk-for-poverty-for-half-a-century/

Young Guard of What?

From the November 1963 issue of the Young Guard

The purpose of this article is to show readers why the Socialist Party of Gt. Britain considers ‘Young Guard’ as just another well-meaning but misguided group who aim, whether they realise it or not, to make the running of capitalism more efficient, or supporting various reforms which they misname socialism.

In contrast, the SPGB holds that the present social system, capitalism, is the cause of working-class poverty and will only be abolished when the majority of the international working class understands and wants socialism.

First must be explained what we mean by the two terms.

Capitalism is a system of buying and selling, where wealth is produced for sale on the market with the idea of producing a profit for those who own and control the means of production and distribution. Socialism, on the other hand, is a system where wealth is produced for use, with the means of production and distribution being commonly owned and democratically controlled by the whole society.

Anything short of this—no matter how desirable it may seem—is not Socialism. For instance, there will be no money in the socialist society, therefore no need of banks and insurance companies; no armed forces, for in society there will exist for the first time a harmony of interests: where the watchword will be— from each according to his ability, to each according to his need.

We say that all reformists— whether so-called leftists or rightists—who tell the workers that their administration of capitalism is Socialism is directly retarding workers realising that Socialism is their interests. Thanks to the antics of Labour Parties the world over. Socialism is now equated with shortages, controls, high rates and taxes, nationalisation and so on.

Young Socialists and Young Guard in particular are perpetuating these myths by supporting the party which, during its last term of office, initiated the production of nuclear weapons in Britain, used troops to break strikes, imposed a wage freeze on trade unionists (and intends to do so again with your help no doubt) became the first party to impose conscription in peace time and started the germ warfare establishment at Porton although your contributor ‘Fianna!, seems to think this was a devilish Tory creation (see Y. G. Aug.).

No doubt Young Guardites hold the absurd view that they can help convert the Labour Party to Socialism, though they might just as well try doing this with the Catholic Church, but even if this were possible who are they to play the educators?

Take a look at the ‘aims’ of YG (which can be changed anytime!) to see what we mean. For example, nationalisation has nothing to do with Socialism and we challenge YG or anyone else to give just one example of nationalisation having benefited workers anywhere.

Again worker’s control is a meaningless term as the abolition of capitalism means the abolition of all classes, so where do these workers come in? Workers control is merely another method of running capitalism which even Mr. Khrushchev is now looking upon with favour. Indeed Mark Frankland, writing in the Observer (Sept. 1st) hit the nail on the head when he pointed out that Mr K’s recent speech to Yugoslav workers, on which he extolled the virtues of workers control, was a waste of breath as they—“Know quite well that their wages depend on profits from their factories.”

We also know that Young Guardites envisage profits under Socialism. Where will these come from? Will workers extract surplus-value from themselves?

To sum up; Young Guardites have as much idea of Socialism as any other reformist group. What they call ‘Socialism’ is merely a Utopian rag-bag of ideas none of which, if implemented, would fundamentally alter the wage slavery of the working class. The interests of that class lie in the abolition of capitalism and this, we repeat, they will do when and only when they understand and want Socialism.

“Fair enough” you may say, ‘But how will they get this understanding?” Our reply is that they certainly will not get it by being told that Labour administration of capitalism is Socialism. This simply draws the antagonism of the workers for the failures of that Party onto Socialism and produces a working class which, by its many disappointments at the hands of Labour, is disillusioned and more confused than ever as to what Socialism is, let alone how to achieve it.

The only way is for Socialists to preach Socialism and nothing else, at all times. The more the workers hear expounded a revolutionary alternative to the present set up, the quicker will they demonstrate that they are just as capable of latching-on as anyone else.

Vic Vanni

Ex-Secretary of Woodside Constituency Labour Party

The Boss Doesn't Always Like Progress

We all have this image of capitalism as a tremendously dynamic system constantly inventing new products, including the tools of production, and improving on existing ones. However true that maybe there is another side to it. With the success of the Tesla car there is a renewal interest in the life of Nikola Tesla, the inventor of the type of alternating current we use today. 

The recent TV series on his life mentioned that for a time he was financed by the most powerful man in the world, J.P. Morgan, the head of the Bank of America. Tesla told him that if the induction cable he was working on was a success, copper would no longer be needed as a means of induction. Morgan cut off Tesla's funds, because he owned thousands of shares in copper mines. 

How about a society where no such stupid barriers will exist?

For socialism, 
Steve, Mehmet, John & contributing members of the SPC.

If Anything is Good To Go It's Capitalism

Stats-Canada reported that Canada's economy lost jobs for the second month in a row in May. 7,500 jobs were lost, but don't worry folks, according to our friendly record keepers, it wasn't a blip on the radar, as the unemployment rate held steady at 5.8 per cent – go figure - no pun intended. 

The trouble is, according to Thomson Reuters Eikon economists, who are supposed to know these things, predicted an increase of 17,500 jobs! Robert Kavic, senior economist at the Bank of Montreal, is very happy saying the economy is running near potential and predicts the Bank of Canada will raise its key interest rate in July; to quote, ''We think the bank is still good to go''.

 I don't know how the redundant 7,500 feel about that, but if anything is good to go, its capitalism and right into the garbage bin of history.

For socialism,

 Steve, Mehmet, John & contributing members of the SPC.

Our task in the Socialist Party

Vague and misunderstood, or meaningless, phrases have proved useful weapons to the ruling classes, or would-be ruling classes, throughout history as means to rally to their support the mass of the population. Every class that has risen to power has exploited its own particular catchphrases to blind and mislead the rest of society. The antidote to the blind following the blind is to arm yourself with the necessary knowledge that will acquaint you with the road you must travel to achieve your freedom from wage slavery. Once you have grasped the fundamentals of your position in society you will lay down the policy to be carried out and you will not require ‘‘leaders” and understand the futility and foolishness of trusting in "leaders.” Socialism will not be possible until the mass of the workers understand it and are prepared to vote for it. If a working class that did not understand socialism were to vote for it, the result would only be chaos, as the first attempts to put it into operation would bewilder the majority of people and leave the way open for a counter-revolution. When the workers understand socialism they will know what to expect and what will be involved in putting it into operation.

The Socialist Party views the imposition of poverty in any of its aspects (jobs, housing, education etc.) on any grounds whatsoever as a feature of capitalism. Within the ambit of that system’s production for profit ethos, scarcity is an inevitable feature. Capitalism cannot exist without poverty, without unemployment and without penalising those who, for whatever reason, do not offer the profit system the maximum surplus value. The failure of good intentions, Keynesian 'magic' and reforming zeal to remove the social ugliness of capitalism should drive people to consider an alternative form of social organisation, such as socialism.  The abolition of poverty and the abolition of capitalism shall be accomplished at one and the same time.

 Until the workers arrive at that stage in the development of their knowledge of their own position in Society, which we, in the Socialist Party, term “class-consciousness.” The Socialist Party must carry on the work of education and agitation, to help in producing that knowledge or consciousness of the fact that their misery and poverty is due to one class in society owning all the means of life—as the land, machinery, factories, railways, etc., and the wealth when it is produced—while the working class owns only the energy, ability or power to work—inseparable from the workers themselves—which they have to sell day by day or week by week, in order to obtain the necessaries of life. With every improvement in technology, with every fresh application of science to industry,— the number of workers required to produce a given amount of wealth, or number of articles, continually decreases. We thus get the apparent paradox that while the amount of wealth produced increases the number of unemployment increases also. This antagonism of material interests causes a struggle to arise over the share which each is endeavouring to obtain of the wealth produced. And the only way out of this vicious circle is for the working-class to recognise this opposition of interest between themselves the producers—and the capitalist class the appropriators and to end this intolerable system by taking bold of the means of life to be owned and controlled by the workers in their social capacity. There can be no crying of peace where only the conditions of war exist, and any assistance given to the capitalist class, either politically or economically, is a direct injury to the working class.

 Parliament cannot make something happen simply by passing laws: otherwise, there would be no crime. And some laws are widely ignored. But Parliament has the power to enforce its decrees and to punish those who go against them; if Parliament chooses not to use its powers, that is not evidence that that power does not exist. Parliament controls the state machine, which means the armed forces, the police, the prisons, and so on. If socialists were to ignore this and seek to seize power by some means other than capturing Parliament and so controlling the state machine. we would be courting disaster. If there are cynicism and scepticism about political activity and about the power of Parliament (which is not borne out by the large turn-out in important elections) this is a side effect of the evident futility of what Parliament does. And far from glossing over the problems of persuading the working class to see through the propaganda for capitalism and to consciously opt for a new society, this is our preoccupation as a socialist party. Whatever the circumstances surrounding former revolutions, the fact is that they have all been in the interests of one minority against another. The overthrow of capitalism and its replacement by socialism must be the act of a conscious majority of the working class and will, therefore, be democratic and not based on violence — although, if a minority were to try to obstruct the will of the majority, they would, of course, be dealt with.

Workers who are in the police and armed forces are as susceptible to the case for Socialism as anyone else. With the development of socialist consciousness the state machine’s power will progressively decline to the point at which, when the majority are socialists, it will disappear. The few policemen or soldiers who are left may well prefer to play football to trying to defend a discredited inhuman system at death’s door. The case for socialism is based on a materialist interpretation of the evidence of history. Idealism, well-meaning or otherwise, it certainly is not.

What then is our alternative to voting Labour (or Tory or Nationalist for that matter)? A vote for the set-up Labour (and the other big political parties) stand for is a vote to remain enslaved. Enslaved by the wages system and the world market which, regardless of government action, decree unemployment, slumps, trade wars sometimes leading to real wars, destruction of food “surpluses”, mental anxiety, the wreckage of the environment, adulterated food, shoddy houses and ugly cities. The only worthwhile vote is for a political party having as its sole aim the replacement of this system by another, one which we call socialism and define as a world of common ownership, democratic control, production for use and free access. In this country, this means voting for the Socialist Party of Great Britain where it presents candidates and, where not, registering your view by writing the words WORLD SOCIALISM across your ballot paper.

The wages gap

The income of people who earn more than £150,000 a year has increased by 89% under the Conservative government. The figures also showed the total income of those earning under £20,000 a year has risen by 1.8% in the same period.

HM Revenue and Customs data which shows the total income of this group has gone up from £3.7bn in 2010/11 to £7bn in 2015/16.

Over 400,000 people in Scotland earn less than the living wage.

https://www.bbc.com/news/uk-scotland-scotland-politics-44752555

Challenging Human Nature

 Many critics dismiss socialism as impossible because of human nature, that people are inherently selfish and greedy. The human nature basic argument typically goes like this: “Socialism will never work because you can’t change human nature. This is why there will always be capitalism and why a better system than capitalism is impossible ” Human “nature” not unchangeable, it is not the nature of human beings to be greedy and selfish. The human “nature” argument is plausible because it has such a long pedigree. Even the Bible, for example, teaches “original sin” and that people were all born ‘wicked’. It is also plausible because it seems to fit with the history that all past attempts to achieve a society of freedom and equality failed. Finally, it is plausible because it seems to explain a lot of our personal experience – all those occasions when we have been treated badly or let down by friends. All this plausibility, however, does not make the argument sound. Yes, it is true that everyday life presents plenty of examples of selfishness, callousness, lack of sympathy and so on, but it is also the case that it offers many examples of the opposite, of kindness, self-sacrifice, and solidarity – of people who support and defend each other in the workplace, who help strangers in difficulties, who risk their lives to save those in danger, who devote their lives to what they see as good causes. IF it really were human nature to be selfish such altruistic behaviour would either be non-existent or at best extremely rare, but it is not.  If our ancestors had been driven primarily by self-interest and greed, our species would never have survived. People have lived in societies for the vast majority of human history where greed and selfishness were alien to the band. One anthropologist after another, of all political stripes, have reached the same general conclusion that greed and selfishness are not a fixed part of our nature; and that, on the contrary, co-operation and mutual aid was a dominant feature of much of human society for the vast majority of our history.

It is certainly true that an elite and their hangers-on who own the vast majority of the world’s wealth are motivated by greed and selfishness. But the vast majority of us are not "naturally" selfish – though some of us can, indeed, learn to be so.  The capitalist system is based on exploitation. Surplus value is extracted from the working class by the capitalists and is the source of all their profits. It has caused and continues to cause, untold human misery and suffering. It is certainly a system where the devil can take the hindmost. Greed and selfishness are actively promoted as virtues. In capitalism, the greedy of the world have discovered their ideal legitimating cover: the promotion and defence of an exploitative system that turns the vice of selfishness into the highest virtue human beings can attain. Self-interest, envy, and greed epitomising the ideal of the “self-made man” is simply the ideological expression of the economic reality of capitalism and has nothing to do with “human nature”.

 Capitalism gave rise to the working class which learned to combine and unite, to give each other mutual support in order to defend itself against the capitalist predator, providing a counterweight to the dominating idea of individualism.  It pushes them towards association and solidarity as soon as the social conditions allow it. Solidarity and altruism are essential needs. People need the solidarity of others, but they also need to show solidarity to others. This is something which can be seen even in a society as alienated as ours. Some argue that altruism is also a form of selfishness because those who practice it do it above all for their own gain or pleasure. That may be so, but that’s just another way of putting forward the idea defended by socialists that there is no essential opposition between individual interest and collective interest, quite the contrary in fact. The opposition between the individual and society is an expression of societies based on exploitation and private property because how could there be a harmony between those who suffer from oppression and exploitation and the very institutions that guarantee and perpetuate this oppression and exploitation?

It is capitalism, which separates the producer from what he/she produces. In socialism, where there is no state dominating society and no classes either since there is no form of exploitation, where everything that it is produced is purely for human needs and not profit, each member of society will be living in true freedom. Because humanity can only realise its innumerable potentialities in a social way, and because the antagonisms between individual interest and collective interest will have disappeared, new and immense vistas will be opened up for the flowering of each individual. Socialism will be above all a society of diversity because it will break down the division of labour that obliges almost everyone to limited, restricted roles for their entire lives.

Abridged and adapted from here

https://libcom.org/blog/human-nature-communism-16062018

Scottish Slavery

Human trafficking is a complex crime which involves adults and children being traded and exploited for personal benefit. It is an abuse of human rights which causes victims lasting physical and psychological damage. Trafficking can involve victims being sexually exploited or forced into the role of a servant, or trapped in forced labour, with nail bars, car washes and construction amongst the industries where potential cases in Scotland have been reported.

 54 per cent of people in Scotland said they don’t believe it is an issue in their local area.

There were at least 53 potential victims of modern slavery in Scotland during the first three months of 2018 - and eight of them were children. One Romanian girl was suspected of being sexually exploited, while the final child, a Bulgarian girl, was the victim of unidentified exploitation. The most common type of exploitation for adults in Scotland was labour exploitation, involving 27 potential victims from 10 different countries. 12 adults were sexually exploited, two were forced into domestic servitude, and four were cases of unknown exploitation.

https://www.glasgowlive.co.uk/news/glasgow-news/human-trafficking-in-scotland-14874652

Not Our Idea Of Equal Social Access

In its edition of June 14, the Canadian Jewish News ran an article about a company run by its workers. The California-based Morning Star Company, the world's largest tomato processor has no managers but has shown a rapid increase in profits. 

Decisions are made collectively by the biologists, farmhands, factory workers and accountants who work there. This doesn't mean they are all paid equally, in fact, ''The highest paid employee receives only six times more than the lowest''. 

Some folks on the left would say its an example of socialism at the point of production, but its no such thing. The workers still work for wages and the company still have to realize a profit in the market. That they are not exploited by a capitalist as such means nothing because they are exploiting themselves.

 Although workers at this operation may experience less of the crasser edges of capitalism's worst behaviour towards workers, the whip of necessity in a for-profit society requiring the cash nexus to live is not our idea of equal social access to the means of life. 

We, of the SPC, want to do away with all forms of exploitation.

For socialism, 

Steve, Mehmet, John & contributing members of the SPC.

Slaves and Serfs

Our forebears wore brass collars to let all and sundry know that they were the property of some master. Now we are labelled and numbered and coded and filed to a nicety. How old are you? Where were you born? Who was your father and mother? How many children do you have? How long have you been working or out of work? Astonishingly some working men and women believe they are free.

The rich are getting policies that serve their interests at the expense of working families and the environment. Quite simply, in the United States today, a handful of billionaires and the corporations they run exercise extraordinary power over our economic, political, and social life. It is a global issue as oligarchs and authoritarianism spread from country to country. The world to-day is in the hands of billionaires-owners of the biggest corporations, the biggest banks, the biggest transport companies; in short, owners or controllers of Big Business. Nearly everything we use or need provides profits to them. These billionaire capitalists, not only own or control the chief means whereby we work and live, but, in fact, control the whole governing machine. They pull the strings. And they use their power to make themselves richer and richer—at our expense. They hire workers to make profit out of their labour; their capitalist production is for profit, not for use: and to get more profit they slash wages, carry through speed-up and worsen conditions. Poverty, insecurity, and malnutrition are making their inroads in the homes of millions. 

In Russia, it is Vladimir Putin and his cronies who rule. In China, President Xi Jinping steadily consolidates power around himself and his inner circle. In Saudi Arabia and other Middle Eastern monarchies, a handful of multibillionaire despotic sheiks exerts enormous power. And across Europe we are once again seeing the rise of demagogues like Hungarian Prime Minister Viktor Orbán.  America's Trump, therefore, should not be seen in isolation. He is part of a global trend and represents a symptom of a much broader problem: a small number of extraordinarily wealthy people, motivated by greed and power, who see the planet as their plaything.

These forces have proved adept at taking advantage of the very many real concerns that hundreds of millions of people face throughout the world. People rightly feel that the establishment and status quo has failed them. They are struggling financially, fear for their children’s future, and are grappling with the loss of social and economic status. Rather than address these grievances, however, demagogues create scapegoats and pit one group against another.

 In socialism solidarity will be the basis of society. Everything is ripe for a bold and independent policy on the part of the workers. It will not happen until the workers decide to take their own future into their own hands. It is a sign of the times that more and more people are discussing the meaning of socialism in practice. They are not content with the reiteration of the socialist classics. Simple answers, set formulas or self-declarations can no longer be substituted for hard analyse. Socialism seeks to eradicate the basic causes for war, unemployment, poverty, hunger and disease, which it knows are the products of capitalism. We are for world socialism as the only way to abolish all the evils of modern class society. How can the workers end capitalism? The answer is that a socialist revolution can do it. Without breaking the power of the capitalists it is impossible to get rid of capitalism or to build socialism. The, workers have the power to overthrow capitalism. It is the capitalists who are powerless, powerless to move a single inch towards the essential reconstruction of society. It is the workers who are strong from the very moment that they unite and resist.

The Socialist Party will carry on an independent campaign of education and attack upon the political field, and as a consequence represent the socialist idea in politics. The oppressed and exploited do not need a new reformist party.  We need a socialist one. Our numbers in the Socialist Party are small, but our potential is huge. Labour Party is the party of reform par excellence. Nothing it has said or done, nothing it has promised could arouse much enthusiasm in anyone looking for more appreciable easement within capitalism than he was getting anyway, let alone anyone wanting an end to the system. That is why we stand for socialism. The nature of capitalist cannot be changed. The yearning of the peoples of the world for lasting peace on earth and good will among men can be fulfilled only through a social system based on human needs. That is socialism. World socialism is the goal of humanity. It is the only way to have peace and security. Building a class-free socialist society involves a gigantic process of remoulding all aspects of social life. It involves a constant change in the relations of production, in the mode of distribution, in the labour process, in the forms of administration of the economy and society, and in the customs, habits, and ways of thinking of the great majority of people. It involves the fundamental reconstruction of all living conditions: reconstruction of cities, a complete revolution in the education system, restoration and protection of the ecological equilibrium, technological innovations to conserve scarce natural resources, etc. All these endeavours, for which humanity possesses no blueprints, will give rise to momentous debates from the point of view of the overall interests of the people, as opposed to sectional interest. Only through the final victory of world socialism can the vast stores of available scientific knowledge really be put to work for the full benefit of humanity.

Green Socialists

After decades of campaigning and legislation, most environmental problems have not substantially improved, and, indeed, some have become much worse. Among people there is an increasing awareness of the threat of climate change and there now seems to be a genuine interest in searching for the deeper roots of the problem. The ecology movement has called into question many aspects of modern consumerist society that are complicit in the environmental crisis. If a future socio-economic arrangement is to be sustainable it must take these criticisms to heart. Getting to the roots of the problem implies that we examine the socio-economic system under which we live. To do this, however, ecological ideas are not enough. If we seek to adequately explain the reasons for the environmental crisis we must clearly understand the economics of society that lead to environmental destruction.

 Many are convinced that the resources used by humans have already far outstripped the carrying capacity of the planet  that expanding population numbers present the greatest ecological crisis. The crude population explosion theory quickly collapses  when we focus on the question of how resources are distributed. The present surplus levels do not account for today's scarcity and hunger. There is more than enough food produced to sustain the current level of world population. Yet food somehow manages to avoid the mouths of those who can't afford to pay the price, being fed to livestock for the affluent to increase profitability yet it is the poor who gets the blame.

What is rarely raised in discussion is an alternative society without a profit-oriented economy. In other words, socialism which produces what people need, not what makes a profit Such a society would, for the first time allow genuine possibilities for ecological sustainability. With democratic control of economic activity we could realise the potential to recognise and stay within the limits of the ecological carrying capacity of the earth. Without profit-seeking businesses operating in their own interest, we will have eliminated the major social forces which resist environmental safeguards.

Some environmentalists activists lead the call decentralisation and localism. While it is important to pay attention to question of large-scale concentration of industry, doing so does not solve all of our problems. Certain industries require centralisation for efficiency, and economy of scale actually may reduce environmental impact in many of these cases. Each town cannot have its own factory to produce trains, yet the demand for transportation will not simply evaporate. The key is to meet this demand at an ecologically appropriate scale under a system that places a priority on protecting the environment. Under the current system, new technologies will always be implemented in order to create new products to sell, and to increase productivity for firms attempting to be more competitive.  Yet the introduction of a new technology does not automatically spell greater exploitation. A vision for a socialist society which functions in a complementary way and in harmony with nature is our goal. 

The mainstream environmental organisations seem unable or unwilling to absorb the hard political and economic lessons being taught to them, and continue to hope that capitalist institutions can live up to their promises. Such hopes are bound to be disappointed. The relationship between people and our environment is a central question for millions across the world today and has raised the spectre of environmental destruction on a scale previous generations could barely have imagined. The most serious issue is the threat of global warming which seems to be occurring already with many unusual weather patterns and extreme events. To the Socialist Party, the argument is simple enough. It is that the roots of the threat to the environment and to the future of the planet lie in the capitalist system itself and they cannot be solved within the capitalist system. The answer to this terrible threat is to build socialism. 

Without the drive to make a profit, wouldn't workers in the vehicle industry assert a right to insist on proper safety and anti-pollution features being built into all cars? Wouldn't workers in the food industry compel thorough standards of hygiene and prevent introduction of impurities and adulteration of any kind? Wouldn't construction workers in the architect office an the building site to assert their authority over what they demolish and what they build? . The problem is not industry or science, but the organisation of production under the control of a minority which lives by the greed of profit before all else. The continuing viability of civilisation itself demands  a social revolution that ends the threat of environmental disaster depends on that the class on whose labour the whole system rests upon. The future of society, and the environment, relies on whether the global working class can wrest control of society from the parasitic few and commence production for need and use instead of for profit and capital accumulation.