Socialist Party Head Office
Forum Replies Created
-
Posts
-
Spanish leaflet advertising the new site. Scroll down for the English translation:
Por un mundo de acceso libre
La clase obrera mundial tiene 2 opciones:
Opción 1 Dejar los recursos productivos globales en manos de los capitalistas, con la esperanza de que nos caigan encima algunas migas de la mesa de los ricos.
En este caso, seguirán el caos económico y las amenazas existenciales (guerra, degradación ambiental). Porque el capitalismo obedece a su propia dinámica incontrolable.
Opción 2 Unirse para expropiar estos recursos a los capitalistas y convertir el sistema de producción en una cooperativa global, en un sistema en el que el motivo único de la producción sea la satisfacción de las necesidades razonables (materiales y sicológicas) de todos.
Eso es el verdadero socialismo. Y es factible ahora porque las condiciones objetivas (recursos industriales y agrícolas masivos) ya existen.
¿Y vos? ¿Qué opción prefieres?
Más info: http://www.worldsocialist.org/?lang=es-ES
Sin fronteras, sin estados, sin clases
* * * * * * * * * * *For a world of free access
The world’s workers have 2 options:
Option 1 Leave global productive resources in the hands of the capitalists, and scrabble around for a few crumbs that fall from the tables of the rich.
With this option, capitalism’s economic chaos and threats to our very existence (war, environmental degradation) will continue. Because capitalism obeys its own uncontrollable dynamic.
Option 2 Unite to remove control of those resources from the capitalists and convert the production system into a global cooperative, where the sole motive for production is the satisfaction of the reasonable needs and wants of all.
This is true socialism. And it is possible because the objective conditions for its establishment (massive industrial and agricultural resources) have already been met.
Which option will you choose?
No borders, no states, no classesHere’s what our comrades in the Socialist Party of Canada say in their May monthly report
The Liberals under Mark Carney won 169 seats at the federal election on April 28. This was 3 seats short of the majority they needed; the Progressive Conservatives winning 144. The N.D.P. won 7, the Bloc Québécois 22 and the Greens won one. Most people thought it would be a tight race, which it was. Both Pierre Poilievre and Jagmeet Singh lost their seats, which must’ve been humiliating. In Poilievre’s case it may well have been his smart-ass personality and his constant personal attacks on his opponents which done-him-in. With Singh, whose party lost 7 seats, it was probably because so many would-be N.D.P. voters voted Liberal, not wanting to split its vote, thinking Carney would do a better job of standing up to Trump than Poilievre, which was the main election issue.
The Toronto Star endorsed the P.C.’s in the election on April 28. Its main points were, Canadian’s should support a government that is for free enterprise, Eliminates barriers, meaning cutting red tape, Restores fiscal discipline, reform the tax system and develop our natural resources and “That is why we are supporting Pierre Poilivere and the Conservative Party of Canada”. Since its founding in 1892, the Star’s main mantra has been to this effect, “Hey listen up folks, capitalism isn’t the economic piece of junk Marxists would have you think it is. No Siree, it’ll work just fine if you smooth away its rough edges”. You might think that with their crusading and reforming zeal they would support an openly reformist party like the N.D.P. or its predecessor the C.C.F., but they went for a blatantly “Screw the working-class party”.
Of all the provincial Premiers, Alberta’s Danielle Smith seems the likeliest to make a deal with Trump. This is probably because Alberta does a lot of business with the states selling oil and energy. Smith has given Carney a list of energy related demands which includes scrapping a federal tax on oil and gas emissions, eliminating an electrical vehicle mandate and ending prohibitions on single-use plastics. That sounds tough, but some of those issues apply to other provinces.
Carney now has to form a coalition of sorts to get legislation through. Besides taking on Trump’s junk, Carney will have to deal with a possible postal strike, a health system in near chaos, a political wild card in Alberta, Ms.Smith, an upcoming G7 in that province, crime which is out of control, housing problems galore including homelessness and a soaring cost-of-living, especially grocery prices; like, “Good Luck, Mate”.
For the working class in Canada, life would be slightly better if Canada did not become state 51, but nevertheless exploitation is exploitation and whether one is exploited as an American or a Canadian it sucks and not a one of the recently elected M.P.’s will take a stand against it.
A thoughtful response to our leaflet from an elector in Folkestone:
If I understand your position correctly, the Socialist Party of Great Britain believes that meaningful change can only happen through the democratic abolition of the current capitalist system, and the need for a system that prioritises human needs over profit resonates with me.
However, I would like to better understand how Socialist Party representatives would engage with the existing structures in the meantime.
If Socialist Party candidates were elected to our local council, would they seek to influence decisions in ways that could incrementally empower local people, for example, by advocating for greater community ownership, encouraging democratic participation, or supporting measures that improve housing conditions, even within the current system? Or would the position be to abstain from participating in decisions that do not directly challenge capitalism as a whole?
In essence, I am curious: while recognising that systemic change is the ultimate goal, how would Socialist Party councillors use their platform day-to-day to represent and support their constituents? Are there specific steps you envision towards addressing issues like homelessness, unaffordable rents, and poor-quality housing, to use your example? How would you use your voice, which is effectively the representation of your voters’ voices, in practical terms?
Members distributed about 1400 of our second Folkestone leaflet today, so about 3000 this week. Hopefully most of the remaining 2000 will get done in next 3 days.
The count starts at 10am on Friday.
Report from Kent and Sussex branch
The last of our 17,000 leaflets are due to be delivered this week (mix of commercial and member distribution).
We have had a second leaflet printed that is adapted from the one used in Stroud to target the central and Harbour wards where most of our committed supporters live, mostly as a reminder. We’ve ordered 5000 so far which start going out tomorrow by members.
There will be group of local members out Sunday afternoon with nice weather forecast in Folkestone. Any other volunteers welcome (it’s just under an hour from St Pancras on High speed train). If you are interested email spgb.ksrb [at] worldsocialism.org
Kent and Sussex report that 2000 copies of a second leaflet, based on the one used in Stroud, have arrived for distribution.
Kent & Sussex branch report on Folkestone:
The mainly commercial distribution of our election leaflet to about 18 000 letter boxes is ongoing but we still have an opportunity to put out a second reminder leaflet in some areas preferably those done earlier and/or in the more revolutionary localities.
We are thinking of getting the leaflet promoting our candidate in Stroud adapted for Folkestone and may be able to have some printed ready for delivery on Wednesday, a week before polling day.
A sympathiser has emailed us this observation:
I cannot find in any mainstream press publication or show any critique of the recent action by Starmer’s government where £15 billion was pledged to provide more military hardware to Ukraine only a day before they announced a huge reduction in funds for welfare.
I have long held the belief that we live in a psychopathic system, in the sense that those in charge display maybe all or at least some of the traits of psychopathy: lack of empathy, superficial charm, manipulativeness, lack of remorse, grandiosity, impulsivity and poor behavioural control and this action surely displays this. No money for life and plenty of money for death.
The people of the world are being lied to. The increase in military funding for Ukraine is built on a lie or huge misinformation of the truth and this is happening through the national broadcaster the BBC. Repeatedly we are told that only a huge show of military strength in and on the borders of Ukraine with Russia, in Poland and in all of eastern europe will hold back Putin and deter Russia from expanding westward. This is utter nonsense. Russia has never held an intention of pushing westwards it just wants no NATO bases close to its country. Can we imagine for a moment that NATO was a Russian led military organisation and had bases all over mainland Europe pointing towards the UK and US? The reaction of the UK /US would likely be far worse than what Putin has pursued. Possibly we all wouldnt be here now, gone in a Nuclear explosion?
For the truth on the causes of the Ukraine conflict and much more I would urge all readers to listen to Jeffrey Sachs ‘Roaring Ukraine speech at EU’.
A comrade who is reviewing Nick Heath’s book The Idea: Anarchist Communism, Past, Present and Future points out that it is says this about “The emergence of the conception of Communism”:
“It should be remembered that neither Babeuf nor Maréchal had invented the term “communism”. The idea of a free and equal society brought about through the sharing of the fruits of the earth goes back to a multitude of religious and philosophical writings.
A first written mention of the word “communist” itself was found in the book of condolences of the parish of Guillestre (Hautes Alpes) in France in 1789. Babeuf, of course, never used the word himself, calling himself a communalist, believing that a community of goods would result from a community of work.
With the fall of Robespierre there is a mention of the word communism when Restif de la Bretonne talks about a general assembly of the Club du Pantheon, which was one of the most democratic in Paris. ‘A citizen demands the rejection of the Constitution and the establishment of communism. This eye-witness report was published in Paris in 1797’. (Marius Berou in an article in Le Peuple no 1537 20th November 2002 p 8-9)”.A reader wrote to the CPGB-ML asking, on the basis of this 50 Years Ago item:
“I wonder if you could help me fathom out what Chairman Mao meant, when he wrote the following:
‘Apart from their other characteristics, the outstanding thing about China’s 600 million people is that they are ‘poor and blank’. This may seem a bad thing, but in reality it is a good thing’
&
‘To make China rich and strong needs several decades of intense effort, which will include, among other things, the effort to practise strict economy and combat waste ie, the policy of building up our country through diligence and frugality’
The later sounds like something a capitalist politician would say. But surely he can’t have been happy that people were poor, to hard work hard and received little material reward for their labours.”They got the following reply:
“You are very correct that comrade Mao wasn’t happy with poverty or hardship that had been enforced on the Chinese people through a century of European colonialism and later Japanese aggression.
What was needed to eradicate that was to build up a strong system to meet the needs of the people and the industries to supply those needs. In short, changing property relations and increasing the means of production. Due to economic reasons (low productive base and lack of colonies) and socialist values (not willing to exploit their own people or other peoples ala the western building of capitalism) they by necessity had to rely on their own labour to accumulate the resources to better their living standards. This requires some curtailment of immediate consumption to better develop an increase in necessities later.
With regards to the ‘poor and blank’; any lifting of oppression to a people that had suffered much oppression and endless famine would be accepted glady, and it was! This enabled the Communist party to steadily increase living standards for the vast majority of the the Chinese people. They would educate (honestly!) the need for waste reduction and being frugal because as the means of production were held collectively, the sooner the ability to produce more was achieved (which requires investment of some surplus labour that would ordinarily be comsumed) the better the entire peoples’ lot would get.
And yes, capitalist politicians do advocate austerity and tightening belts for the ‘nation’. But their nation is led by the bourgois for the bourgois and we have seen clearly that the workers bear the cost of austerity while the capitalists claim the rewards. Compare China, who have made monumental strides in lessening poverty since their revolution, and here in Britain where aside from a short period after WW2, have seen nothing but lowering of living standards.
Often appeals from leadership can appear to be the same on the surface but the key is to ask “which class do the leadership serve?” and “what is the purpose of that appeal”.
That is how I understand it.
Regards,
J.
CPGB-ML”Our reader commented that they “wondered, who today would seek to defend the biggest mass murderer in history? Well, who else but the CPGB-ML.”
Email received at Head Office:
Just to let you know I put in a protest vote ‘Socialism SPGB’ at my local polling station in the Sunderland Central constituency. I could not think of voting for any of the other parties as they all support Capitalism.
The following letter has been sent to Gove today.
Mr Gove,
We notice that, in a speech to Parliament on 21 May, you referred to the Socialist Party as jostling to share a platform with islamists in support of the state-building activities of Hamas.
This is not true. We have been a political party using this name since 1904 and never in our history have we shared a platform with islamists nor have we ever supported an attempt to create new states. In fact we are opposed to all religion and any existing or nascent nation state as they are nothing other than tools of oppression in the service of the capitalist class, whose expropriation by the working class is our sole aim.
We would therefore request that you note this for future reference and take steps to correct the public record that is Hansard to remove your damaging misinformation.
For Socialism
Stephen Finch
Assistant SecretaryManchester branch report:
“A Manchester branch member distributed 95 antiwar leaflets at a smaill-ish demo in Bolton today.
Another member had intended to attend but was prevented from doing so by rail service disruption.”
