Whilst
we, as humanity, remain divided by rival capitalist states, it is be
impossible to organise our use of the world in careful and sensitive
ways that would be in the mutual interests of all people. Instead, we
have economic exploitation, waste, war and destruction. Although we
mostly think of the market system in terms of private corporations or
state enterprises, it is also true that each nation is a "national
business." A national economy must do its budgeting and keep its
accounts as an autonomous trading nation. Governments must maintain
national security. This is the protection and enforcement of national
interests both within the state and between states. Externally,
national security involves diplomacy, negotiated agreements and the
formation of alliances which in turn can be backed up by networks of
spies and where necessary the threat or use of armed force. The
strategic aim is the ability to trade at the best advantage.
As
caretakers of national economic strategy, governments aim to promote
national advantage whilst reducing vulnerability. For example, energy
supply is of vital concern to all governments but the world
distribution of energy sources, oil, gas, coal etc., is uneven
between nations. One reason why the Middle East has been an ongoing
theatre of war for many years is that it holds the world's biggest
reserves of oil. In the past, with the Suez Canal, it was also a
vital trade route.
The
solution is to replace corporate or state ownership for money gain
with common ownership by all people. Instead of nation states all
people could be part of a world held in common. This would bring the
great advantage of being able to organise the world as one productive
unit. Being united around a common interest people in socialism could
organise and develop their productive activity in relation to the
natural advantages of the earth in whatever appropriate geographical
location and with a use of production methods which safeguard the
world environment.
Without
national barriers it would be possible to use large scale production
in appropriate areas to make available world stocks of materials for
manufacture, basic foods such as cereals and world energy supply.
From this basis of world production, smaller scale diversified
production could be carried on throughout regional and local
communities in line with local work preferences and local needs.
In
these circumstances instead of rival nations fighting over oil
reserves, as mentioned, the production of energy could be
co-ordinated by a specialised world agency working as part of the
United Nations Organisation. The long term objective could be to
achieve sufficient world energy supplies from ecologically benign
sources. The possibility of a world organised as one productive unit
adds to the wide range of advantages that people in socialism would
enjoy.
With
the world shared between all people an early priority would be to
remove the differences that at present exist throughout the various
regions. In practical terms this would require a concentration of
world activity in favour of those regions where poor facilities for
local production, storage, transport, irrigation, energy supply,
communications, buildings and services such as medical care, etc.,
would need to be improved. This would call upon the efforts of people
in the more developed regions.
It
might be asked, "Why should someone in a more developed
community in Britain, America or France, work without money
incentive, to provide equipment and machinery for people in less
developed regions?" The candid answer is — self interest! This
is not to deny the abundant evidence there is that we can gain
satisfaction and pleasure from helping people in need but the added
reason why we all have an interest in cooperating with others is that
the benefits are mutual. Up to a point, the more people producing and
the greater range of skills that are used, increases not only
productivity of labour but also the range of products that can be
produced. Stranded on a desert island, on our own, we would be
reduced to surviving on the barest necessities. Since stone age
times, our increased powers of production have depended on our
diversity of skills.
In
the wheat belt of South West Australia a farmer might be supplying
cereals for distribution throughout the world. It is likely that the
eventual consumers of this wheat will never know the identity of the
person who helped produce it. This does not matter. The farmer would
do his job in the knowledge that in distant locations others were
working to supply not just the whole range of foods he enjoys but
also the refrigerator, television, computer, hi fi system, etc., that
make his life style possible. In socialism our participation in a
world-wide division of labour would involve us in much more than
technical factors of production, it would include us in the work of a
true world community.
If
the people of the world are to stave off the global catastrophes that
now loom before us, they are going to have to cast oaside their
lingering nationalism and patriotism, recognise their common
humanity, and begin working for the good of all, promoting the
cooperative commonwealth.
No comments:
Post a Comment