Friday, February 07, 2025

Mr Underwood continues to profit


Further proof that capitalism sees wars and military conflicts as a profit generating bonanza and cares not for the human suffering it engenders.

‘Washington is sending obsolete weapons to Kiev and replacing them with new systems ordered from private contractors, the Ukrainian leader has claimed

The Ukraine conflict has been a bonanza for the US defence-industrial complex, which has benefited from massive contracts for weapons meant to supply Kiev and replenish domestic stockpiles, Ukrainian leader Vladimir Zelensky has said.

In an interview with British journalist Piers Morgan Zelensky argued that a significant portion of the billions the US has allocated to Ukraine has in fact circulated back to boost US domestic arms production.

“Part of the money that people in the US talk about was actually financing production in the US,” the Ukrainian leader said. “The companies that were producing weapons [for Kiev] received this money… American companies now have contracts for these arms at the highest prices in the last 50 years because there is such huge demand due to the Russian offensive.”

A significant part of the funding went to “specific companies, specific plants, making profits for specific people. It went toward the salaries of US citizens working in those companies,” he added.

According to Zelensky, the campaign to support Ukraine has also helped the US renew its arsenal, as Washington has in many cases supplied Kiev with relatively obsolete weapons produced in the 1970s and 1980s. He added, however, that Ukraine is grateful for the help, despite earlier criticizing the West for delays and the amount of weaponry being sent.

On top of this, Zelensky argued, “the US received from Ukraine the experience of modern, large-scale land warfare. Americans and Europeans – but Americans in the first place – have all the information… on what in American weapons works and what does not.”

Thursday, February 06, 2025

Up our game?

 

'Chris Philp MP reckons that ‘we have got [to] be competitive and it means we have got to work hard. As a country we need to up our game’. What he meant was ‘we have to get you plebs to work even harder’ so that the owning class can up their game on the international market.

Nine million working-age adults are currently not working, he said. You might think this has something to do with unemployment and the state of the job market. But politicians naturally lay the blame on those who are suffering and have no say in the economy.

Our advice to you: tell the owners that the game’s up and help us to abolish the wages system!'


https://www.worldsocialism.org/spgb/

Wednesday, February 05, 2025

Wages

 

As Marx once said, I wouldn’t want to belong to any club that would have somebody like me as a member. Not Karl, but Groucho who said that.

In the Marx Brothers 1929 film, The Cocoanuts, Groucho as the proprietor of a failing hotel is challenged by the bellhops, who haven’t been paid for two weeks. They want to be paid. Do you want to be wage slaves, asks Groucho. No, they reply. What makes wage slaves asks Groucho. Wages!

We don't want to belong to the club that is capitalism. Who, after all, wants to continue to be a wage slave all of their lives? There's only one answer, socialism. To quote Del Boy, you know it makes sense!

The below is from the Socialist Standard January 1963

‘The value of the commodity human labour power is determined by the cost of reproducing the worker's expended skill and energy and, also, of reproducing future wage workers. On the average, wages equal this value.


However, in different countries, according to circumstances, the value of labour power varies. In the lesser developed countries we find, as a rule, a lower standard of living and therefore a lower value than in more advanced industrialised areas. Important factors in the more developed areas are a greater consciousness in workers, and organised arrangements for the protection and advancement of their interests.


Wages are not, as some people think, the workers' share of the wealth they produce. Capitalism is not a national share-holding concern. Let it be clear —Capital is wealth used in the reproduction of wealth in order to realise profit. Variable capital, the wages fund, together with constant capital, are both in existence before the act of production takes place. The workers’ labour power is bought by the capitalists and is used to create wealth. The worker, having worked, has a legal claim to the agreed wage. A sale and purchase have taken place and no question of shares arises. Shares are exclusively for the owners and shareholders, and they come from the surplus value wrung from workers.


Wages must be considered from three aspects. The first, nominal wages, or the actual amount of money paid: second, relative wages, i.e., the proportion of wages paid to the total wealth produced: third is the actual purchasing power of wages—real wages.


The basic conflict between the two classes, capitalists and workers, shows mainly in the first two aspects (wages and profits). Provided that other factors remain constant, an increase in one must cause a decrease in the other. In this, the productive sphere, the social relations are direct between owners and producers (employers and workers) regarding rates of pay and conditions of labour. The amounts of nominal and relative wages are determined here.


We can now consider briefly the conflict between wages and profits. To begin with, let us assume a weekly wage of £10 for a 40 hours week and a rate of exploitation of 100 per cent. An increase of five per cent. in wages would enable the workers, other factors remaining constant, to get 10s. p.w. more for the same quantity of labour. His standard of living is improved and the necessary labour time increased, while surplus labour time is reduced. The rate of exploitation is reduced from 100 to 93 per cent, and the relative wage now represents 55 per cent. of the total product as against the former 50 per cent. A reduction in the working week may also be beneficial for workers; they may obtain the same pay for less work.


The above situation is a most unpleasant one for the capitalist. In the first instance it means an increase of 5 per cent. in his variable capital. It reduces his surplus labour time and his surplus value. The rates of exploitation and profit have also fallen. But although temporarily defeated, the capitalist is undaunted and adamant. He is well aware of his excellent facilities for recovery.


It is quite possible, and it frequently happens, that increased wages or reduced working hours can be offset by a fall in relative wages. This can be brought about, for example, by increased production as a result of better organisation and supervision, etc. The introduction of more efficient machinery and the displacement of labour is another way. An increase in output of 6 per cent. would in some ways offset the five per cent, increase in pay or the reduction of hours. In such conditions, although the nominal wage is higher, the relative wage is lower. More wealth is being produced for slightly less pay.


Other means by which earnings may be increased as distinct from increased rates of pay are, overtime, piece work, or bonus on output systems. These methods entail longer hours of labour, or more intensive labour, or both. Increased earnings in such cases are at the expense of extra sweat and toil and in these conditions workers cannot increase their earnings without increasing the profit of their masters. The working classes' only gain, if such it can be called, is in having the rates of pay increased or the hours of labour reduced. The struggle between wages and profits is unending and the employers are as a rule better placed.


Social evolution has produced three distinct forms of exploiting societies. In chattel slavery men were owned bodily. In feudalism, the serf, semi-free, was compelled to provide a certain proportion of his labour for the overlord. In both cases the surplus was easy to see. But modern wage labour, unlike the other two, appears to be fully-paid. In all three systems men were, and are, deprived of the fruits of their toil by an owning class. Private ownership of the means of production and control of the ability of men to work has enabled the ruling classes, in all cases, to own the wealth produced.


Slaves, serfs and proletarians all had to obtain food, clothing and shelter. This subsistence differed in amount, quality and kind in the different periods. Today the wage worker is legally “free." Socially he is compelled to sell his ability to work in order to live. But he may select where and to whom he will sell it—in theory only!


Capitalism is the highest and most efficient form of exploiting society and its wages system conceals to a great extent the legalised robbery of its wealth producers. The separation of labour power from labour is responsible for the appearance that workers' wages are the full value of their labour. The fact that the value of the embodied labour may be £20 or more, and wages £10 or less, is not so evident.


High wages and low prices, security, and a happy, prosperous and carefree working class, are illusory. A fair day's wage for a fair day's work is a fallacy. The abolition of capitalism with its wages system is an indispensable task for the workers. Working men and women can only attain their freedom, independence. and control of the wealth they produce. in a Socialist system of society. Production to satisfy human needs as distinct from privileged greed, is the Socialist object.’

John Higgins

https://socialiststandardmyspace.blogspot.com/2020/01/what-are-wages-1963.html



Tuesday, February 04, 2025

Socialist Sonnet No. 180

Barriers

 

Close the borders of the land of the free,

Throw up interlocked fences, build a wall

Or, better still, both, thereby keeping all

Clamouring criminal migrants at bay.

Call out the National Guard, a show of strength

By bristling patriotic warriors.

Next, time to erect tariff barriers

And be prepared to go to any length

To make this a country of succeeders.

 Promise the people they’ll be securer,

Even when everyone’s so much poorer,

Everyone, that is, except the leaders.

It seems the question of security

Is finally solved through ethnic purity.

 

D. A.

Sunday, February 02, 2025

How to avoid queues


Poem for Roger McGough

by Adrian Henri

‘A nun in a supermarket
Standing in the queue
Wondering what its like
To buy groceries for two.’

Most folk waiting in a checkout queue at a supermarket, or anywhere else, are probably think, 'kin hell, how much is all this going to cost along with, why don't they open more checkouts, this queue is ridiculous.

When socialists are in a queue the thought that runs through their mind is, why aren't the working class working toward socialism because then there would be no queueing up to pay because in socialism there is no money, goods are produced for free access..

Before the shilling for capitalism brigade respond with, oh, so socialists condone theft! Yes we do, but the theft we condone on the measures implemented by the minority capitalist class to exploit the majority class.

‘Retail crime in the UK has reached unprecedented levels, with soaring losses from theft and rising violence against workers, the British Retail Consortium (BRC) has reported.

According to its latest annual crime survey, shoplifting in the country has reached an all-time high, with more than 20 million incidents committed last year as of August 31, which equates to 55,000 a day. This cost retailers a total £2.2 billion ($2.7 billion), adding further pressure to the mounting costs retailers already face.

Violence and abuse against retail staff also spiked, with daily incidents exceeding 2,000, up from 1,300 reported the previous year. This marks a more than threefold increase from 2020, when the daily average was just 455. Weapon-related incidents doubled, reaching 70 per day.

Retail crime is spiraling out of control,” said BRC chief executive Helen Dickinson. “People in retail have been spat on, racially abused, and threatened with machetes.”

The BRC report suggested that many of the incidents were linked to organized crime, with gangs systematically targeting stores across the country, often stealing tens of thousands of pounds’ worth of goods and moving around multiple stores.

Every day this continues, criminals are getting bolder and more aggressive,” Dickinson warned.

According to the survey, satisfaction with the police response to incidents remains low, with 61% of respondents describing it as ‘poor’ or ‘very poor.’

With little faith in police attendance, it is no wonder criminals feel they have a license to steal, threaten, assault and abuse,” Dickinson argued.

Responding to the report, police have claimed they have made “significant strides” in tackling retail crime over the past year.

The country’s new Labour government has pledged to address the rise in retail crime through stronger measures.

Latest data by S&P Global shows that retail sales in the UK continued to fall in January after a disappointing Christmas, and consumer confidence has dropped to its lowest level since late 2023.

Employers also slashed jobs at the fastest pace since the height of the Covid pandemic in 2021. Excluding the health emergency, the rate of job-cutting was the highest since the global financial crisis in 2009.

The UK is facing a “stagflationary environment,” where sluggish economic growth coincides with high inflation, said S&P chief business economist Chris Williamson, as quoted by The Guardian.

A separate report issued by the BRC this week showed that British food prices have recorded their sharpest monthly rise since last April, marking an “early sign of what’s ahead” for the economy. Year-on-year, the cost of food in January jumped 1.6% from the previous year.

Dickinson has also warned that retailers would soon face the full impact of £7 billion (nearly $9 billion) in new costs introduced in the last budget by Chancellor of the Exchequer Rachel Reeves. Reeves has announced an overhaul to Britain’s benefits system, to “kickstart economic growth.”’

The Proper Gander column from the September 2020 issue of the Socialist Standard

‘The High Street was already on the financial skids before the pandemic, which has sped up the shift to online shopping. And these days, going to the shops has the added considerations of facemasks, social distancing, arrows on the floor and sanitisers by the doors, making it more of an ordeal than before. Despite all this, slick, brightly-lit shopping malls are still there to tempt those looking for either retail therapy or a five-finger discount. The latter were the focus of Channel 5’s recent Shoplifters: At War With The Law. This fly-on-the-wall documentary series follows the security guards and their quarries at two interchangeable shopping centres: West Orchards in Coventry and Weston Favell in Northampton. It was filmed pre-Covid 19, so since the cameras left, the guards are presumably on the hunt for people not wearing masks as well as people not paying.

According to the programme’s voiceover, last year, there were 400,000 shoplifting incidents reported nationwide, with the number of those that go undetected estimated to be 20 times higher. Of course, we don’t see any of these, and the shopping centres understandably want the programme to emphasise the chances of getting nabbed. Regardless of this, the show has plenty of tips for would-be pilferers, such as going with a group of friends to distract the guards while items are slipped into pockets elsewhere. And higher-end goods with electronic tags attached can be dealt with by snipping them off with pliers or hiding them in a bag lined with foil so they don’t set off the door alarms.

Watching out for all this are hundreds of HD CCTV cameras, whose footage is relayed back to each shopping centre’s control room. When the guard on duty there sees someone acting shiftily or gets a tip-off from one of the shops, they can radio down to their colleagues to find their target. It’s all quite sad to watch this game of cat-and-mouse, although a couple of the guards get a kick out of their work. ‘I always catch my prey,’ boasts one, ‘that’s why I do my job. I love it’. The guards can only apprehend someone once they’ve left a store, although they cynically assume ‘anybody that’s in the shop is a shoplifter until they go to the till’. Those who are caught are led to a bleak holding room to be questioned and have their bags searched. The police will be called if the person has ‘gone equipped’ with a foil-lined bag or pliers, or if what they have stolen is valued at over £200. If the goods are worth less than this the police won’t usually be involved and instead, a year-long ban from the shopping centre is issued. If the accused says they have no ID, they’re asked to bring up their social media profile instead. Their name, address and date of birth are taken, as is a mug shot for the database. If they are seen to return to the centre, they will be trespassing and the police will be called. The guards have had plenty of practice with the procedure: the West Orchards team ‘take down’ up to ten shoplifters a day, as they put it.

The programme-makers blur out the faces of the people caught, which also has the effect of emphasising how dehumanising the need to shoplift is, and the rituals around it. Some of the people featured have been recruited by gangs, and probably have very little choice in the matter. They tend to be from Eastern Europe, not able to claim benefits and without much chance of securing better paid work, which makes them vulnerable to exploitation from organised gangs. Most of the value of any successfully shoplifted goods is likely to go to the gangmasters, with those who take the risks receiving little back; a more extreme version of mainstream employment. These gangs tend to move between areas once they become too well-known in one place. Nearly three quarters of shoplifting in West Orchards is carried out by a small group of local repeat visitors. Many of these are homeless, with or without a benefit claim, either stealing to get enough food or to fund a drug habit. One man speaks to the camera crew after he’s thrown out for the umpteenth time: ‘I’ve got nothing. I ain’t got no-one. But … I’ve got the shops.’ The guards tend to treat those who are pushed into shoplifting by poverty with some sensitivity, as long as they don’t get lairy.

But Shoplifters: At War With The Law doesn’t want us to feel too sympathetic towards people who steal. Its voiceover makes the point that shoplifting ‘takes more than £2 million out of tills every day’, and that to make up for these losses shops have been ‘ramping up prices for millions of honest shoppers’. It’s easy to claim that theft raises prices, but this falsely implies that retailers would lower prices below the market rate if people stopped stealing, which of course no retailer would ever do, so it just scapegoats people who shoplift and provides an alibi for inflated prices. The costs of security measures and stolen items do impact on the profitability of goods to some extent, so the chain store owners will be keen to clamp down on shoplifting. But a few pinched bottles of perfume or boxes of chocolates are nothing compared to the billions of pounds creamed off by owners and shareholders.’

Mike Foster

https://socialiststandardmyspace.blogspot.com/2020/09/ive-got-nothing-i-aint-got-no-one-but.html


Friday, January 31, 2025

SPGB Meeting TONIGHT 31 January 1930 GMT ZOOM

 

COMMUNISM: AN IDEA THAT IS REVIVING (Zoom)


Event Details

  • Date:  – 

Speaker: Adam Buick

To connect to a Zoom meeting, click https://zoom.us/j/7421974305

Thursday, January 30, 2025

Anyone still backing Britain?


Winning the global race for growth?

"I'm Backing Britain" was a brief patriotic campaign, which flourished in early 1968 and was aimed at boosting the British economy. The campaign started spontaneously when five Surbiton secretaries volunteered to work an extra half-hour each day without pay to boost productivity and urged others to do the same. The invitation received an enormous response and a campaign took off spectacularly; it became a nationwide movement within a week. Trade unions were suspicious of, or even opposed to, the campaign, considering it as an attempt to extend working hours surreptitiously and to hide inefficiency by management.

The campaign received official endorsement by the Prime Minister, Harold Wilson, but it found that being perceived as government-endorsed was a mixed blessing. The Union Flag logo encouraged by the campaign became highly visible on the high streets, and attempts were made to take over the campaign by Robert Maxwell, who wanted to change its focus into an appeal to 'Buy British', but the campaign's own T-shirts were made in Portugal. After a few months without any noticeable effect on individual companies or the economy generally, interest flagged amid much embarrassment about some of the ways in which the campaign had been pursued and supported.

It has come to be regarded as an iconic example of a failed attempt to transform British economic prospects.'

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/I%27m_Backing_Britain



'Britain’s factories suffered the deepest slump in orders since the first Covid lockdown and are braced for worse to come as demand from customers in the UK and overseas withers.

Businesses are slashing investment amid rising taxes and red tape, according to the Confederation of British Industry’s survey of the manufacturing sector.

“Manufacturers have entered the New Year in a grim mood. Confidence has evaporated over the last three months as orders have dropped,” said Ben Jones, economist at the business group.

“A fall in domestic deliveries comes amid widespread concerns over the impact of the increase in National Insurance contributions, minimum wages and changes to employment law on firms’ operating costs.”

Much of the global manufacturing sector is struggling with German industry gripped by high energy prices, weak demand and stiff competition from Chinese car manufacturers, while China itself is also battling against an economic slump caused in part by a property crisis.

As a result British factories have few orders from overseas.

“Export prospects appear worse than at any time since the pandemic, reflecting a slowdown in overseas demand and reports of ongoing difficulties securing supply contracts with customers based in the EU,” said Mr Jones.

He called on the Government to inject fresh confidence into the economy.

“Several firms noted concern that negative sentiment risks becoming self-fulfilling,” said Mr Jones.

“The government can play a role in re-booting confidence by sending clear signals of intent on policies that could support the manufacturing sector, notably delivering an industrial strategy that helps the UK win the global race for growth, matching skills to economic needs, and accelerating our energy transition and resilience.”

The share of businesses reporting falling orders outweighed the proportion with rising demand by a margin of 20 percentage points, the worst since July 2020.

Expectations for the coming quarter are even worse, with the net balance anticipating growth in orders falling to minus 32pc, the lowest since April 2020, at the start of the first Covid lockdown.' The Telegraph

The below is from the    March 1991 issue of theSocialist Standard

'Since its evolution out of feudalism, the capitalist system of society has ensured that there has been a long-term expansion in the productive capacity of the world. TVs, computers, weapons capable of mass wreckage at one stroke—all these things that were once unthinkable have become basic features of life, at least in the more developed areas of the planet where capitalism has been dominant for many decades, and in some instances, hundreds of years.
Although capitalism broke through the fetters placed upon production by the feudal system and has expanded the forces of production to an unprecedented degree in the years since, the expansion of productive capacity and output under capitalism has never proceeded in a straight line. Notions of steady growth and constantly increasing well-being owe more to the rhetoric of politicians than the actual reality of capitalist development.

As a system, capitalism grossly underuses the technology and potential for production that it has helped develop. On one level, this can be seen by the growth in employment of people who are not engaged in intrinsically useful activity—bankers, accountants, insurance workers, armed forces personnel and so on. But even when capitalism can be said to be working at “full capacity”, with expanding output, growing productivity and booming sales, a period of “under-use” is always around the corner.

Falling output
Capitalism in Britain has reached just such a turning point. The last few years have seen fairly steady growth, with rising productivity and increased investment in those expanding sectors of industry that were making the headlines in Thatcher’s last years in office—particularly microelectronics and information technology. Much of that growth and expansion has now been halted.

This has not, of course, prevented the present government from arguing that the downturn in economic performance is just a "blip”. Only in November 1990 was John Major (when Chancellor) prepared to admit tentatively that Britain is in recession. The government currently defines a recession as being a situation when there is a negative growth rate for two successive quarters, but this “official" definition hardly matters to the thousands being thrown on to the dole queue or the thousands of others forced into bankruptcy.

Britain, in common with a number of other countries, is now in a situation where industrial production is falling and unemployment is rising. Although the official unemployment statistics have been doctored to the extent that they have become virtually meaningless as a measure of the actual level of unemployment in Britain, they do at least indicate trends—and the current trend is up. Manufacturing production has been falling since April last year and in the three months to November fell by 2.7 percent compared with the previous three-month period (Independent on Sunday,  27 January).

So far as governments and politicians are concerned, falling rates of growth and high levels of unemployment are signs that something has “gone wrong". When things start to go wrong for capitalist governments they often look for a scapegoat— like some hapless (ex-)Minister whose irresponsibility and recklessness is blamed for having brought the period of growth to an end. In Britain this role has been allocated to former Chancellor Nigel Lawson, a man previously described as "quite brilliant" by Thatcher and Major. But governments taking the credit when output is expanding and unemployment is low, and finding a scapegoat when things get rough is based on the mistaken assumption that the capitalist business cycle results from the policies they pursue. They may like to think that they are in control of the economy and that when things go wrong they can put them right again with the correct policies, but this is a fantasy.

Over—expansion
What governments fail to realise is that an economic recession is not an example of capitalism “going wrong" because of some dreadful ministerial error. Economic recessions with stagnating production, growing unemployment and a further slide into poverty are entirely normal—and necessary—features of capitalist development. This is because of the inner logic of the capitalist system's drive towards expansion.

The conditions for the development of an economic recession are present even when the capitalist system is in a period of boom, or relative prosperity. One thing that is immediately noticeable is that the operations of capitalism are not planned at the level of the whole economy. Decisions about investment are made by thousands of competing enterprises operating independently without social control or regulation. This means that when business is booming and when profits and growth rates are high "over-investment" by some enterprises will inevitably occur. In pursuit of future profits they expand their productive capacity beyond what the market which they are producing for can absorb.

A particular industry over-investing and expanding its productive capacity beyond the limits of market demand in this way is the usual cause of an economic crisis and subsequent depression. If capitalist growth was to be achieved in a controlled manner, eliminating booms and slumps, then growth would have to be balanced in each sector of industry. But the growth of an industry is not linked to the demands of other industries—its growth is determined by the expectation of profit, and this inevitably leads to a disproportion in investment and a disproportionate expansion between the various branches of production.

When an industry has over-produced for its particular market, this will have a knock-on effect for firms operating in other sectors of the economy. For instance, if an enterprise is no longer able to sell the commodities it has produced on the market at a profit, production will be cut back thereby slowing output. This will provoke a chain reaction as the enterprises' suppliers will no longer be able to sell all their products either, which will in turn affect their suppliers and then their suppliers' suppliers, and so on. Such an overproduction for selective markets therefore only has to appear in a few key industries for a crisis to break out and spread—reducing overall growth rates and increasing unemployment. And it all arises out of the general anarchy of production inherent in the capitalist system.

Boom—slump cycle
After a period of generalised stagnation and high unemployment, capitalism will be able to move out of the slump phase of its trade cycle. Although a recession has devastating consequences for the working class, no slump is permanent and once many of the weaker capitals have gone to the wall—with their assets being sold off cheaply to their competitors—the prospects for investment and expansion improve again. Capital depreciation, coupled with reduced interest rates caused by reduced demand for money capital, and lower real wage rates in a recession, mean that the prospect for making profits improves and industries begin to expand once more, taking on more workers. The cycle then begins all over again. As Marx pointed out in the last century:

The factory system's tremendous capacity for expanding with sudden immense leaps, and its dependence on the world market, necessarily gives rise to the following cycle: feverish production, a consequent glut on the market, then a contraction of the market, which causes production to be crippled. The life of industry becomes a series of periods of moderate activity, prosperity, over-production, crisis and stagnation. (Capital.  Volume I. page 580, Penguin edition).

Now that capitalism has become a world system the "sudden leaps" of production referred to by Marx are not nearly as immense as they were in the capitalist system's historical ascent when whole continents of the Earth still had to be brought into the "factory system" with its wage-labour and capital relationship. Indeed capitalism, having raised the forces of production to a level where a society of abundance is feasible, has outlived its usefulness for humankind, and its cycles of boom and slump are a testament to its inherent inability to utilise resources efficiently. Capitalism can only advance so long as there are periods of regression when workers are made redundant in increasing numbers. when growth stagnates and when poverty spreads—not merely in the "developed" areas of the world but in the weaker capitalist states also, where the effects of the capitalist trade cycle are often felt hardest.

Most importantly of all, there is nothing that politicians can do to eliminate the boom-slump cycle—it will be around as long as capitalism itself. Capitalism cannot be efficiently planned as anarchy of production and uneven development are at the very heart of the system. All attempts at planning capitalism have ended in disaster—most notably in state capitalist countries like Russia and China where production seems to be in an almost chronic state of stagnation and where unemployment has. at least until recently, been masked by overstaffing.

The only way to take the abundant resources of the Earth and use them in an efficient manner is to establish a system of society based on common ownership and democratic control, where articles of wealth will be produced solely for use and not for exchange on a market with a view to the profit of a minority. Only then will crises, booms and slumps be a thing of the past and only then can production be geared to satisfying the needs of the inhabitants of the Earth.'

Dave Perrin

https://socialiststandardmyspace.blogspot.com/2020/03/crises-booms-and-slumps-1991.html




Wednesday, January 29, 2025

The problem isn't Trump, it's capitalism

 

There is no doubt that Donald Trump is an unpleasant individual. Many people call him racist, sexist and narcissistic – with good reason. His attitude towards the environment, immigration and the under-privileged is awful.

But social divisions, racism and environmental destruction all existed before Trump’s presidency and they will continue after it. While his language is particularly nasty, like all capitalist politicians he represents a brutal system that puts profits before people. A different president might have been a ‘lesser evil’ but they would not have ended the problems inflicted by the profit system.

We don’t need to get rid of a particular politician or party. We need to abolish the whole capitalist system and the profit-seeking force that drives it.


https://www.worldsocialism.org/spgb/




Tuesday, January 28, 2025

Socialist Sonnet No. 179

Memory Moving Forwards

 

The road thus far from Auschwitz-Birkenau

Continues being paved with good intentions,

Although there are frequent dissentions

From notions of human rights, even now.

Too many fingers ready to point out

Those who are to be considered others,

No matter they be sisters and brothers,

Even if unrelated by blood. Doubt

Does not seem to bother the demagogue

Who savours every bitter word spoken,

Yet has no words to mend a world broken,

Fractures they would conceal in night and fog.

Look for a fresh way, don’t just follow orders,

Choose the road less travelled, beyond borders.

 

D. A.   

Monday, January 27, 2025

Peace accords needed, Socialism needed more

 

On 27 January 1973 an agreement was signed in Paris, Paris Peace Accord, that meant the end of the Vietnam war. Unsuccessful peace talks had also taken place in 1966.

If peace talks would end the conflicts presently taking place and causing so much death and destruction then the outcomes would be worth the effort. The only real solution to both present and future conflicts is 'goodbye capitalism, hallo socialism.'

A reminder that the working class have no country, something those who are currently supporting a belligerent USA would do well to remember.

As the writer of the piece below correctly predicted, Vietnam is now firmly ensconced in the world of capitalism.

From the Socialist Standard August 1968

'The peace negotiations, coming in the middle of hostilities without either side obtaining an overwhelming decision, will cause many people to ask if the Vietnam war has been worth fighting.

Let us look, therefore, through the ideological smokescreen that has been blown over the mass murder there and see what are the real interests involved.

The Vietnam war is an example of an established capitalist power being challenged by an up-and-coming one. America, having helped to smash Japan in the last World War, and being in control of South Korea and Taiwan, is the dominant power throughout the Pacific, but is being challenged by China.

That America can suddenly try to negotiate a peace underlines the conflicting interests that lie behind the American government. Robert Kennedy, in running for the Presidential candidature on a policy of peace in Vietnam, is indicative of such interests, which are further demonstrated by the rise of many stocks and shares on both the U.K. and American Stock Exchanges at the news of peace.

But opposing interests arc demonstrated by the losses on the Metal Exchange and Wool Market:

Copper, the most strategic of the raw materials, fell sharply yesterday on the London Metal Exchange when news of the Hanoi peace talk moves reached the market.
After a quiet morning, when the forward wirebars price had eased by £5, afternoon dealings saw the price “drop like a stone by £20 before anyone had a chance to open their mouth", according to one dealer.
By the close, cash wirebars were £45 lower at £527.10s. and forward metal lost £38.10s. to £493 a ton.
Stop-loss selling also pushed down the prices of the other base metals, but to a lesser extent.
Japanese reactions. Wool prices on the London terminal market were up to l.9d. a pound easier, a movement directly related to the fact that a large part of Japan’s economy is hinged to the American commitment in SE Asia —and to the fact that Japan takes around 30 per cent of the Australian wool clip.
There is a fairly logical belief that Japan will be cutting its wool purchasing if peace is achieved in Vietnam. (Financial Times, 4/4/68).

Some of the American capitalists hope to profit from the extensive cash crops and the minerals resources from the mines — the coal, copper, tin, zinc, bauxite, manganese, phosphates and gold and precious stones. They would also like to retain Vietnam as a market for American goods. All this cannot be in the interests of the would-be rulers of Vietnam and one can understand that they win fight against this almost to their last worker.

Those who believe that the “free world” is concerned in fighting for lofty principles should read reports from Indonesian newspapers. Indonesia has been reluctant to join Western-backed military pacts in S.E. Asia. Djakarta newspapers are rather sceptical about calls for “unity to fight communism" in Vietnam  Gotand Rojong recently quoted a Republican member of the U.S. Congress, who alleged that during June last, nine British ships, one Italian and one Cypriot ship carried 76,000 tons of cargo, (including, he claimed, strategic goods) to Hanoi — more than was delivered by Russian ships in the same period. During the first six months of this year, he stated, the number of ships from the "free world" calling at North Vietnam ports had shot up to 39, compared with 20 in the previous six months. So much for capitalist principles!

Ho Chi Minh, the so-called communist leader of North Vietnam, takes great pains to mislead the workers under his control.

He holds himself out as being at heart in favour of the workers, but pleads that capitalism won’t let him do all he would like to do for them. That if only the workers would oust the American colonialists then everything would be all right.

Like their counterparts elsewhere in the capitalist world the rulers of both North and South Vietnam have managed, with the help of the profit system, to create scarcity in the midst of plenty. In Vietnam, of all places, the climate ensures that crops are lavish to an incredible extent. Even the fish thrive to such a fantastic degree that the facetious maintain that the sea surrounding Vietnam consists of 90 per cent fish and 10 per cent water. But the food ration for the North Vietnam troops is 1½lbs. rice a day and for the civilian poor, starvation is never far away. Ho proclaims that he is out to defeat capitalism and colonialism and that North Vietnam is a communist state run for the benefit of the workers, and has changed the name of the Party he leads from Vietminh (National Party) to Vietcong (Communist Party).

But some observers cannot detect any difference between the governments of North and South. A member of the Vatican delegation said that “all they need do is to change flags, and overnight. South Vietnam could be a communist country" (The Making of a Quagmire—David Halberstam).

Both North and South are police states with similar terrorist methods, a wages system, conscription, payment by result, an exploiting class and a working-class.

Russia, China and America have been competing with each other in trying to gain favour by supplying new industries to Vietnam. Of these the cement factories are directly useful in prosecuting the war and so are the roads and civil engineering works.

The country is being opened up and the mines developed, and, at the same time, is rapidly becoming modernised and mechanised. For years the workers engaged in the war have been operating up-to-date equipment, like their opposite members in the American forces. Even the agricultural workers in producing coffee, rubber and rice, are intimately bound up with international markets. They work under capitalist conditions and when the cash crops they produce cannot be sold on the world’s markets they are unemployed.

It is the battles that creates the sensational news coming from Vietnam and help to sell newspapers in the West. But, when peace is declared, and the dust of battle settles, it will be found that a great change has quietly been coming about and that Vietnam will have taken its place in the present day world of capitalism. But there will be another war continuing there — the class war. The world of capitalism is becoming one!

Wealth will be churned out and fortunes will be made. The war in Vietnam will have been worth fighting after all —but not for the workers.'

Frank Offord

https://socialiststandardmyspace.blogspot.com/2018/02/background-to-vietnam-peace-talks-1968.html


Sunday, January 26, 2025

Mental health

 

Some say that if you think you're having a nervous breakdown then you're not. That;s a matter of conjecture. Mental health issues certainly are multiplying and affecting more and more people. This can't wholly be blamed on capitalism because mental health problems go way way back.

Bethlem Royal Hospital, founded in 1247, and known also as Bedlam, recorded its first insane patients in 1403. The institution is famous, or infamous, for its allowing the public to visit in order to observe the behaviour of inmates, rather like going to the zoo.

'Evidence that the number of visitors rose following the move to Moorfields is provided in the observation by the Bridewell Governors in 1681 of "the greate quantity of persons that come daily to see the said Lunatickes".Eight years later the English merchant and author, Thomas Tryon, remarked disapprovingly of the "Swarms of People" that descended upon Bethlem during public holidays. In the mid-eighteenth-century a journalist of a topical periodical noted that at one time during Easter Week" one hundred people at least" were to be found visiting Bethlem's inmates  Evidently Bethlem was a popular attraction, yet there is no credible basis to calculate the annual number of visitors.

The Governors actively sought out "people of note and quallitie" – the educated, wealthy and well-bred– as visitors. The limited evidence would suggest that the Governors enjoyed some success in attracting such visitors of "quality". In this elite and idealised model of charity and moral benevolence the necessity of spectacle, the showing of the mad so as to excite compassion, was a central component in the elicitation of donations, benefactions, and legacies. While a substantial proportion of such monies undoubtedly found their way into the hands of staff rather than the hospital poors' box ,Bethlem profited considerably from such charity, collecting on average between £300 and £350 annually from the 1720s until the curtailment of visiting in 1770. Thereafter the poors' box monies declined to about £20 or £30 per year.'

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Bethlem_Royal_Hospital

There is a traditional folk song, Tabout Bedlamo see mad Tom o' Bedlam

'To see mad Tom o' Bedlam
Ten thousand miles I'd travel
Mad Maudlin goes on dirty toes
To save her shoes from gravel
Still I sing bonny boys, bonny mad boys
Bedlam boys are bonny
For they all go bare and they live by the air
And they want no drink and no money '

https://folkhistory.blogspot.com/2014/04/bedlam-boys-are-bonny.html

Back to capitalism, recently the Blessed Tony, an ex-prime minister of the UK,

has publicly stated that the rise in the number of the working class suffering from a wide range of mental health issues should stop being pussies, should man (and woman) up, and should pull themselves themselves together because they are costing the capitalist class money.

He said, 'I think we have become very, very focused on mental health and with people self-diagnosing. We're spending vastly more on mental health now than we did a few years ago. And it's hard to see what the objective reasons for that are.'

The former PM added: 'Life has its ups and downs and everybody experiences those. And you've got to be careful of encouraging people to think they've got some sort of condition other than simply confronting the challenges of life. We need a proper conversation about this because you really cannot afford to be spending the amount of money we're spending on mental health.' Daily Mail

In a capitalist society there is. inevitably, a conflict between the health needs of the working population and the pursuit of profit. Workers are viewed predominantly as economic units to be exploited for their labour power. The cut-throat nature of capitalist competition obliges manufacturers to keep production costs as low as possible to maintain profits and avoid being undercut by rivals and forced out of business.

'In a capitalist society there is. inevitably, a conflict between the health needs of the working population and the pursuit of profit. Workers are viewed predominantly as economic units to be exploited for their labour power. The cut-throat nature of capitalist competition obliges manufacturers to keep production costs as low as possible to maintain profits and avoid being undercut by rivals and forced out of business.

Conflicts occur because the unchecked efforts of manufacturers to produce goods as cheaply as possible lead to the impoverishment of the workers by the payment of low wages, longer working hours, hazardous working conditions, exploitation of child labour, environmental pollution, and stress from alienating, repetitive, boring work on factory production lines. But a considerable amount of ill-health is caused by the interplay of factors resulting from the exploitation of labour. Accidents are caused by fatigue and hazardous working conditions. occupational disorders are common; gross exploitation leads to poverty, bad housing and malnutrition. However, the provision of health care represents a cost against production to be avoided if possible. The workers try, with partial success, to mitigate exploitation through trade unions and parliamentary reforms by pressing for better working conditions, higher rates of pay and the provision of health and social services.'

https://socialiststandardmyspace.blogspot.com/2021/03/health-service-under-attack-1985.html

By 'We' Blair meant the capitalist class because the burden of funding health care to keep workers fit enough to run capitalism falls upon the the minority class .'

'Rachel from accounts' is said to be considering cutting billions of pounds from funds disability benefits.'

The below is from the Socialist Standard May 2017

'One thing guaranteed to bring out the worst in socialists is rich people banging on about their problems, but one would have to have a heart of stone not to feel some sympathy in the recent stories of princes Harry and William speaking out about their mental health problems after the death of their mother Diana 20 years ago. The revelations were quickly joined by others from Lady Gaga and the CEO of Virgin Money until, ok we get the idea . . . money doesn’t necessarily buy you happiness. But as some wit once remarked, if you think that, try poverty.

And one thing the poor are not poor in is mental health problems. The US Centers for Disease Control 2017 survey reports that 8 million adult Americans, or 3.4 percent, have such problems (New Scientist, 17 April) however this is likely to be an order-of-magnitude underestimation, as under-reporting in this area is rife. According to a 2016 report by the charity MIND, in the UK almost half of adults (43.4 percent) think they have had a ‘diagnosable mental health condition’ during their lives, and while around 20 percent of men and 34 percent of women have had this suspicion confirmed by medical professionals (mentalhealth.org.uk), a further 30 percent said they had never consulted a doctor. This is consistent with a lack of self-reporting across all areas of mental health, possibly because people try to tough it out, or else do not understand that they are suffering from an illness which might be treated but instead believe that they are personally inadequate in some way, for which no cure exists. Women suffer more in all categories. 1 in 4 young women self-harm, an alarming statistic given that self-harm is the most reliable risk factor in subsequent suicide – 1 in 25 hospitalised self-harmers will kill themselves within 5 years. Among UK residents aged 10 or over there is currently around one suicide every two hours (2014 figures). Ironically, given that such people typically have a low or zero sense of self-worth, MIND informs us that the average cost of a suicide, in terms not just of police, hospital and funeral costs, but also of loss of total lifetime ‘output’, is £1.7 million.

Globally, according to the World Health Organisation, mental health problems that are left untreated form 13 percent of the total disease burden, and will by 2030 be the biggest cause of death. The WHO estimates that nearly half the world’s population suffer from some form of mental illness. That’s more than from cancer, heart disease or diabetes. Costs are literally incalculable, as many factors are involved. Costs to the UK economy alone are estimated at between £70–100 billion. Global costs are projected to reach $6 trillion by 2030.

What can capitalism do about any of this? It can’t abolish poverty, a well-documented cause of mental illness. To do that, it would also have to abolish the privilege and luxury of the elite. It can’t abolish its own hierarchy, another well-known cause. It can’t get rid of war, or crime. It can’t take the stress, fear and anxiety out of being a wage-slave except by abolishing wage slavery. It can’t do anything about the entire matrix of oppressions which begins with the CEO yelling at the executive and ends with the black girl kicking the cat. Capitalism is the embodiment of mental illness, a destructive society pathologically bent on chasing its own end. If it was a person, it would be hospitalised as dangerously insane. That half of the population suffer mental illness is not surprising. What is surprising is that the other half don’t, or say they don’t. But then, perhaps nobody really knows, in capitalism, what good mental health even looks like. In a society full of broken people, just managing to get through the day may be deemed ‘healthy’.

Socialism, in doing away with property society’s rules, would do away with most if not all of the environmental factors in mental illness. It’s not a magic cure-all. It can’t address chemical or genetic factors, at least not without more research. It can’t do anything about bereavement. But what it could do is give people a decent life without fear, without low status and a consequent sense of low self-worth. It could give people the support of a strong community, a sense of open possibilities and the freedom to explore them, a chance to determine their own identity and desires and to have these acknowledged and respected by others. There’s nothing magic about it. Socialism would simply stop torturing people. And if that sounds like a hopeless daydream, it’s only because you’re so used to living in a nightmare.'

Paddy Shannon

https://socialiststandardmyspace.blogspot.com/2019/01/the-market-system-bull-bear-and-black.html