Fake Socialism
We are not and
never have
been connected
with Lenin, Trotsky or Stalin. We are not related in any way to
The Scottish Socialist Party, The Socialist Worker's Party, Or
The Socialist Labour Party. We've never had any connection with
the Communist Party, or any of it's offshoots. We have always
been opponents of nationalisation and the idea that capitalism
can be reformed away. We are a party that consciously does not
have leaders and our members are all members of the working class.
Since 1904 we
have
published The Socialist
Standard , which comes out monthly, and all of the above facts
can be checked to have been consistently true as presented in
that publication. We're not trying to get a boy scout badge in
telling you all this, but merely to tell you exactly who we are
as there is so much manipulation, dishonesty, and downright erroneous
thinking connected with all the above parties that we would not
wish to be associated with them in any way.
This isn't
because we're a
bunch of
goody two shoes, but because we want to see the back of capitalism
and the establishment of socialism and often look on in weary
frustration as we see the same failed ideas and solutions being
proferred for the working class to swallow. In fairness to the
above parties, the mainstream capitalist parties also pedal failed
ideas and solutions too. Over the year's some of them have used
vague socialist mouthings to snare worker's votes, too.
When capitalism
is cut to
it's essentials
there are certain features that are always present:
- The extraction of surplus value(profit)
from workers
- The existence of a system of wages and
salaries
- The accumulation of capital
- The monopoly ownership of the means of
wealth
production and distribution by a small minority
- The existence of a State machinery to
maintain and
enforce that monopoly (armed forces, police, the legal system)
- The exchange of commodities with a view
to realising
profit (as opposed to meeting need)
Any system
having this
combination of
features is capitalist, no matter what it decides to call itself. This
is why The Socialist Party at the time of the Russian Revolution, and
ever since,was able to clearly state that Russia had not achieved
socialism and wasn't going to as it maintained all the features of
capitalism mentioned above. The fact that private capitalists did not
have monopoly ownership but a centralised state did was merely a case
of changing the boss. It is no surprise that the new capitalist class
in Russia and the former Eastern Bloc is partly made up of former
communist party nomenklatura, as they had been the priviledged class
creaming off all the wealth made by Russian workers. There is more
recent evidence that a lot of the nomenklatura "retired" by investing
their amassed wealth in property, and now live off the proceeds of
their Swiss bank accounts.
|
From 1906 we
always pointed
out that
the Labour Party would fail in trying to achieve socialism by
reform, and in 2000 there is no doubt at all that capitalism has
reformed the labour party instead as we predicted. nationalisation
was for long enough the cry of the labour party and was often
seen as socialist. Of course, this is nonsense. And, as in Russia,
merely swopping who's boss isn't socialism and it isn't common
ownership of the means of production either.( If common ownership
existed it was a very strange version as most Russians lived in poverty
and under state terror in a country they supposedly "owned")
Tommy
Sheridan (Solidarity) and Arthur Scargill (Socialist Labour Party)both
call for nationalisation. They must hope you have short memories, or
that time has added a sepia glow to the nostalgic views that older
people have. It is ironic that Scargill, perhaps forgetting the miner's
strike of 1984, is advocating nationalisation given that the mining
industry was a nationalised one (and what wonderful employers they
turned out to be!).
|
Sheridan, at a radical book
fair held in
Edinburgh,just as he'd become an MSP
outlined his view of socialism which was nationalisation - with the
maximum and minimum permitted wages of worker being in the ratio of
4-5:1, he added that this lessening disparity of income was realistic
as a society where equality of income existed wasn't realistic.
Besides
making him a socialist who doesn't believe in socialism, the society he
mentions retains every feature of capitalism mentioned above, and
therefore could only ever be a bastardised capitalist society. Even
limited equality can not be achieved, while retaining the profit motive
-It is economically impossible!
Now in typical Trotskeyite fashion he has bust up his party and formed
a new one called Solidarity essentially the same as the one he left. It
doesnt matter what he calls himself
now, so keen is he in gaining power for reforms.
|
While
the Trotskyist Scottish Socialist Party is courting the "Old
Labour" 'socialist' vote, it has also put forward a whole raft of
reformist demands that on paper might seem to be appealing.
The only problem is that there is no plan to actually achieve these
demands - for the reason they are pretend demands. Trotsky himself
called these kind of demands "transitional demands" -the idea being to
look at everybody else's demands and make bigger demands so they sound
great. Occasionally they might achieve a demand which will make them
seem sincere, however the idea isn't to achieve these demands - it is
to not achieve them!
This is the Troskyists' master plan to
make workers dissatisfied, so
the latter will become revolutionary and flock behind their political
leadership. In other words the workers are to be the infantry led by
the Trotskyist generals. And in the worker's state achieved who do you
think will be giving the orders and who do you think will be forced to
follow them? The resemblance to the dead-end and failed Russian model
will be most striking.
Anyone
wanting to pursue socialist ideas should be very careful to
check out what the parties on the left say and should also check out
how democratic these parties aren't! Ask them questions about the above
points and find out as a member just how little say you will have
compared to the self appointed leaderships! You might ask them why we
can be so open and democratic, and they aren't. In fact ask them what
socialism is and how society will be organised - if they were socialist
they would not be shy about telling you all the details, would they?
The Socialist Party is not on The Left -
we wish a society with none of
the capitalist features outlined earlier, one typified by real common
ownership. Air is commonly owned. It is free. Everyone has equal access
to it. Because it is commonly owned no-one has a monopoly on it, and we
all just perceive it being there and do not think of ownership of it at
all. Thus it will be with everything!
Capitalism
can only
exist if the mass of the working class support it.
Currently they/you do, one way or another. Like the emperor with no
clothes, when a majority of people realise that their problems are not
resolved by maintaining it, when they stop accepting it and prefer a
saner, more human alternative, then we can start seeing and acting on
the obvious.
|