Shoulder to the Wheel
1962, and they are still at it! Shoulder to the wheel, nose to the grindstone, tighten your belt, increase productivity but accept wage restraint, now is not the time to relax …. and so it goes on infinitum.
Solemn editorials, T.V. and radio broadcasts, tell us about foreign competition and of the dire consequences if their warnings go unheeded. And of worse to come if British capitalism is forced into the Common Market. The same sources speak grandly of the “nation” and the “community” and the public.
Trade Unions are given unsought advice. If they take positive action in pursuit of a wage claim they are irresponsible, or worse, whereas to knuckle under to employer or government pressure is commended as being statesmanlike. A favourite term, that one.
In a society where the means of production are owned and controlled by a minority, and the majority have to work for wages, there can be no common interests. There is, therefore, no real community or nation, and the fact that the British employing class is faced with fierce competition from other employers elsewhere does not invalidate this. Nor does alleged German or Italian trade success indicate a harmony of interests between their capitalists and workers. The working class of the world will gain nothing and solve nothing by paying any attention to the tales of woe of the powers that be.
At a very dubious “best” it could happen that British capitalism improved its share of the world’s markets, with possibly unemployment for foreign workers to a greater degree than in this country. The foreign employers faced with being squeezed out would attempt to force down wages in their industry, and our own employers would counteract with similar measures.
Of course, the employers throughout the world invariably use the bogey of foreign competition in their attempts to counter claims for wage increases, shorter hours and improved conditions. The real bone of contention is that in a condition of intense trade rivalry the employers cannot automatically pass on wage increase in the form of price increases, but approach the point where they must cut into profits.
Increased productivity or the squeezing out of rivals does not necessarily mean that workers will improve their standard of living or have secure jobs. Often the reverse is true. An example is the position in the American motor car industry after British and other European car imports had been drastically reduced by the production of American “compact” cars. Now, in spite of this cut in imports, the American industry is running at well under capacity, with thousands unemployed and speed-ups for those in work. The advent of the American compacts gave rise to unemployment and short time in the British motor industry and also on the Continent—at Renault in France and Borgward in West Germany for instance.
In shipbuilding, although British yards have lost orders on price and delivery to foreign competitors, the industry as a whole is faced with the problem of increased air travel. The recent completion of the French liner “France” was admitted to be a calculated gamble.
Textiles suffered a severe recession in the early fifties, and on several occasions since then, the crises hitting Japan and the United States as well as Lancashire.
Not so long ago the coal-mining industry was hailed as the industry of the future—with employment assured. The National Coal Board advertised extensively in the Press, and the miners accepted Saturday shift working. Now, dozens of pits are closing down owing to over production, uneconomic working or competition from oil. And the same problem is felt in Belgium and America with thousands of Belgian and American miners out of work.
The point is that production in capitalist society is always a gamble. The markets are unpredictable and many firms tend to over capitalise in a boom period, determined as they are to steal a march on their rivals or at least not to be left behind. Even when a national group of capitalists does corner a market, there is no guarantee that the market will absorb the products indefinitely. Credit buying, planned obsolescence, as well as universal re-armament, have been important factors in warding off a large scale slump, which in themselves are a striking indictment of present day society.
Capitalism presents the working class with the prospect of cut-throat competition in so-called “peace” time and wholesale slaughter when the ruling class rivalries are settled by force.
The economic conflicts of the international capitalist class have produced two world wars this century, the preparation for a third, and countless minor conflicts where the two major power blocs have jockeyed for position. Again, the troubles between the declining European imperialists such as Britain, France, Belgium and Portugal and aspiring native ruling class groups have produced endless bloodshed.
Given the continuation of capitalist society, international rivalry and tension and the glaring paradoxes of unsaleable wealth and worldwide want will confront mankind.
Can any thinking worker seriously challenge our contention that a complete and fundamental change is not only desirable and necessary, but the real challenge of this age?
Socialism, based upon common ownership of the means of production, would engender co-operation. The massive technology collectively at man’s disposal and under his control would not be used to produce commodities for a precarious market, but would be utilised to satisfy people’s needs—on the basis of free access—”From each according to his ability, to each according to his needs.”
F. S.