Our fellow workers must not think of their country but of their solidarity with the workers of all countries.

1. Modern wars are part and parcel of the capitalist system.

 

2. Each capitalist nation is continually driven to seek new markets, new sources of raw materials and new areas for investment.

 

3. The capitalist need to expand continually makes each industrially developed power an imperialist aggressor – whether it is Britain, Russia, China or the United States.

 

4. There can be no end to the imperialist war without an end to capitalism.

 

5. Permanent peace is only possible when planned production for use has taken the place of competitive production for profits.

The Parties within the World Socialist Movement stand uniquely against capitalism. We reject that system utterly and completely in whatever guise it appears. We reject capitalism utterly precisely because there are no solutions to its abundant miseries, like war and unemployment. War, like poverty, slums, unemployment, crime and the rest are not really problems of capitalism; they are integral parts of that system; they exist everywhere the system exists and for as long as the system has existed. They will continue to last as long as capitalism itself lasts.

It is this inevitable competition for markets, this necessary built-in compulsion of each capitalist enterprise to improve its profitability by enlarging its market share, that creates the material conditions for friction between the nations of capitalism.

Within the nation-state conflict is resolved by the legal process and, while the friction created by competitive interests are frequently vicious, it would not, for obvious reasons, suit the national capitalist interest if the naked force became the arbiter in disputes between individual capitalist enterprises.

On the international scene, the situation is different. Some attempts are made to create institutions, like the old League of Nations and the present United Nations, to resolve conflicts of interest between nations. But such institutions themselves necessarily reflect the conflicting economic interests of their members and, anyway, it is impossible to resolve amicably conflicts between national interests when the sense of “justice” of the parties involved are conditioned by the requirements of economic gain and, sometimes, even economic survival.

So each nation-state must maintain its own armed forces to protect the wealth of its national capitalist class from the predatory aspirations of its trade rivals. Sources of raw materials, markets, trade routes and strategic areas for their protection or acquisition have got to be defended by force of arms if necessary or to be gained by force of arms. They represent the vital life’s blood of capitalism and no price in human lives or materials can be too high to achieve them or to keep them.

Within the national state, this means the creation of conditions that make capitalism acceptable to the great majority of the people it exploits. This requires a system of education that underpins the “reasonableness” and inevitability of capitalism and the promotion of “moral” concepts by benign propaganda; it requires a press, radio and television that may be allowed the “democratic right” of criticism but ultimately promotes the notion that, while things might be done better, the capitalist way-of-life is as natural as the seasons. The needs of the capitalist class are nurtured and protected and the fiction created that there is a common “national interest” which is, above all, good and which must be preserved and protected—if necessary by the public power of coercion.

Outside the state, the competing interests of the various national groups of capitalists are promoted by diplomacy and, ultimately, by the capacity of their armed forces to inflict death and destruction on the peoples of any other nation-state that threatens their economic interest.

The whole, obscene setup, with its appalling waste, is even more dangerous because it not only threatens devastating wars and arms buildups over the marketing needs of capitalism but creates hatreds and divisions which acquire an independent propensity for violence and war.

Only in socialism is a lasting solution to war to be found. Socialism is a form of social organisation wherein the sole criterion governing the production of all wealth will be the satisfaction of human needs.

All the resources of the earth, including the tools of production and the means of distribution, will be the property of humanity as a whole and people will apply their skills and energies to these resources in order to produce the things needed by the whole of society.

 Often neglected because of its geographical isolation is the small World Socialist Party (New Zealand) that presently exists of a mere handful of members. This was not always the situation. It has had a presene in New Zealand for over 70 years, and existed as a formal socialist party since 1930.

Despite a series of progressive social legislation as well as being a fertile breeding ground for quack remedies to cure capitalism such as with the Douglas social credit movement, the history of New Zealand politics provides ample proof that reformism cannot solve the problems of the working class. Jacinda Ardern’s government has not succeeded in fixing poverty and it has offered many excuses for its failure.  Living costs in New Zealand have risen sharply as has the price of homes, however, workers’ wages have lagged a long way behind.  Ardern’s government has shown little enthusiasm for redistribution of the riches of the wealthy, much less abolish the rich which is the goal of we socialists. 

The extent of wealth inequality in supposedly egalitarian New Zealand has been laid bare by 2020 figures showing the wealthiest individuals have over NZ$140bn in trusts – and overall have nearly 70 times more assets than the typical New Zealander.



The data show that New Zealand’s wealthiest 1% of adults – around 38,000 people – have $141bn in trusts. Another 150,000 or so people, rounding out the rest of the wealthiest 5%, have trusts worth a further $122bn.



The 1% have an average of $3.6m held in trusts, $1.6m in shares and $470,000 in cash. Their debts are on average just $80,000. The typical person in the 1% is worth $6.2m.

In contrast, the typical New Zealander is worth only $92,000 – 68 times less. 



Among those in the poorest half of the country, meanwhile, the average person owns assets worth just $46,000 and has debts of $33,000, leaving them with a net worth of $12,000. They have negligible wealth in trusts and on average just $4,000 in the bank, leaving them vulnerable to sudden financial shocks.



When it comes to those on middle income – the 40% of the country who are above the mid-point but below the wealthiest 10% – have a higher net worth, on average $352,000, most of it tied up in housing.



Overall, the wealthiest 10% have 59% of all the country’s assets and the middle income is around 39%. That leaves the poorest half of the country with just 2%.

What distinguishes the WSP(NZ) from other political organisations is that it insists that it is futile to concentrate on just a part of capitalism’s problems. The only effective policy is to campaign exclusively for its abolition and replacement with socialism.

The New Zealand socialists have a fresh new website that they hope will introduce younger recruits to the Party. 

 https://www.worldsocialism.org/nz/

TRADE UNIONS AND THE TROTSKYIST LEFT 

Speaker:  Howard Moss.

Sunday morning, 27 March, at 10am BST. Please note that the clocks will have gone forward, therefore this is GMT + 1.

To participate in one of our talks contact Discord Admin for special invite or email spgb@worldsocialism.org.

Loss Leader

Don’t place trust in leaders, leaders tell lies,

They’ll rousingly speak of national missions,

But in their hard hearts personal ambitions

Echo, and all humanity denies.

Their bellicose blather’s so much foul breath

That poisons the air in far too many lands,

They’ve got indelible blood on their hands

Spilled by those they mustered and marched to death.

Leaders talk of courage, dismissing fear,

Of honour gained through personal sacrifice,

Privilege of paying the ultimate price;

All the while the leader leads from the rear.

Though leaders may rise and leaders may fall,

Pity is, there’s no need of leaders at all.

D.A.

The number of UK households struggling with large debts increased by a third in 2021, even before the winter rise in energy prices and the removal of the £20 uplift in universal credit payments.

Analysis and research carried out by the Jubilee Debt Campaign found that in September 2021 almost 10% of households reported that loan and interest repayments were a heavy financial burden, a 35% increase on the previous year’s figures.

Households also reported that their average monthly loan repayments reached a record £373 in 2021, up 22% on the year before and the highest figure for at least a decade.

Surging food and petrol costs have added to the strain on finances since the research was done, and the Jubilee Debt Campaign said the rising cost of living threatened “to push people who are already living on the edge further into debt and poverty”.

Citizens Advice said 5 million people had indicated that they would not be able to afford April’s energy price rises, while in a survey by the Money Advice Trust one in five adults said they were likely to borrow or use credit in the next three months to cover essentials.

 Analysis of households’ reports of repayments on unsecured debt, so does not include mortgages. It showed that in nominal terms and when inflation was adjusted for, these were running higher than over the past decade.

Joe Cox, the senior policy officer at Jubilee Debt Campaign, said, “The worsening debt crisis is toppling households up and down the country … “

Number of UK households with large debts rises by a third | Borrowing & debt | The Guardian

 Living standards in Britain are expected to fall at the fastest annual rate since the mid-1950s and will take until at least 2024 to return to pre-Covid levels, according to the government’s independent economic forecaster.

 Real household disposable incomes per person would fall by 2.2% in 2022-23 as earnings from work fail to keep pace with soaring inflation.

It said the fall would be the biggest in a single financial year since modern records began in 1956-57, and that it would take until 2024-25 for inflation-adjusted living standards to return to their pre-pandemic level.

The OBR said the damage for families would mean lower levels of consumer spending in the UK economy.

The new Nationality and Borders Bill will make the UK “one of the most anti-refugee countries in the world”, a leading international charity has said.

Médecins Sans Frontières (MSF), which employs over 35,000 personnel across 70 countries, branded Commons votes on Tuesday night “shameful” after the Tory MPs ripped out amendments proposed by the House of Lords. Tory MPs reinserted clauses that will allow the government to send refugees offshore and detain them indefinitely – a policy which aid groups say has caused “terrible suffering” when tried by Australia.

“It’s shameful that the government has rejected these moderate, sensible changes, which would have removed some of the cruellest elements of the Nationality and Borders Bill,” Sophie McCann, MSF’s UK advocacy officer, said. “In its current form, the bill will enshrine the UK as one of the most anti-refugee countries in the world, at a time when the devastating impact of war and conflict is absolutely evident.” 

Ms McCann added, “The government cannot be serious about this bill – it is unworkable, exorbitantly expensive, and inhumane, targeting some of the most vulnerable people in the world.” She continued, “There is nothing ‘fair’ about criminalising, detaining, pushing back and imprisoning refugees in offshore detention centres simply because of how they arrive in the UK. Closing off routes to the UK will only push people into the hands of criminal gangs and into more dangerous methods of attempting the journey.”

Pauline Chetcuti, head of policy at the charity Oxfam, said the bill “flagrantly undermines our obligations under international law”, adding, “The Ukrainian conflict painfully illustrates how innocent civilians everywhere have no choice but to flee conflict, persecution and violence. We need an asylum system that is based on the principle of protection, not punishment,” she said.

UK among ‘most anti-refugee countries in the world’ thanks to borders bill, says Médecins Sans Frontières | The Independent

Research conducted by Chatham House last month indicated that most Belarusians do not want their country to participate in this war, and they believe that Belarusian involvement will have catastrophic ramifications. 

Belarusians can be divided into two groups based on whom they support.

The first group gets most of its information from state television, and supports Russia. 

The second group receives news from the independent media, and supports Ukraine. 

The first backs Lukashenko, the second opposes him. 

About 1,000 Belarusians have already been arrested for peacefully protesting; others are sabotaging infrastructure used by the Russian military. 

Hundreds have joined volunteer detachments of the Ukrainian army.

Most Belarusians are united in their objection to the war into which Lukashenko has dragged them. Whether they can make their voices heard or will be silenced again remains to be seen.

Lukashenko is dragging Belarus closer to a war that most of its citizens don’t want | Ryhor Astapenia | The Guardian

 нет войне

O Truth, how many falsehoods are broadcast in thy name

The USA and its allies in Europe won the Cold War when the USSR finally collapsed in 1991. It was a humiliating defeat for state-capitalist Russia. Ukraine, an area that had been contested for centuries, became an independent state. The violence which is an integral element of world capitalism has erupted yet again. Once again we see how capitalism cannot develop an effective means of preventing violence.  Force is a necessary part of capitalism.

The workers of the world have everything to gain by peaceful co-operation, and everything to lose by war. The principal causes of war can be abolished by destroying the political and economic supremacy of the exploiting class. Enough has been said over the year to show that those who are aware of the real forces at work in the modern capitalist world hold out little hope for a future in which war will not rear its ugly and brutal head.

 The only political organisation in this country to consistently hold and propagate the view, during that the League of Nations and then the United Nations would inevitably fail in its professed purpose of preventing war was the Socialist Party. We knew that peace would not come merely from the setting up of “right” machinery, nor would war come because we may lack this machinery. We knew that, given the capitalist system, with the competitive struggle for markets and its conflicts over spheres of influence, etc., war was inevitable. As a result, our analysis was not welcomed by the many peace groups. It is not sufficient to work simply for peace. Our task is to work for a new social order. 

 Problems still remain because the causes of war were not removed. When the capitalists are faced with threats to their interests they will not stop to consider the “rights” or “justice” of the case. They will not forfeit their “right” to act in their own interests. They will move to defend these regardless of the legalities of international law.

“…war, organised war, is not a human instinct. It is a highly planned and co-operative form of theft. And that form of theft began ten thousand years ago when the harvesters of wheat accumulated a surplus, and the nomads rose out of the desert to rob them of what they themselves could not provide.” Jacob Bronowski wrote in The Ascent of Man.

The decision on whether and when to use force is therefore dictated first and foremost by our national interests. In those specific areas where our vital or survival interests are at stake, our use of force will be decisive and, if necessary, unilateral.

The Socialist Party because it understands the nature of capitalism and its inevitable development refuses to be lulled by all sorts of reformers who pander to ignorance by claiming to have solutions for problems that are incapable of solution within the framework of capitalism. We are aware that this attitude is unpopular.

 The UN has failed to agree on a treaty to protect the high seas from exploitation. Despite two decades of discussion, there is still no treaty protecting international waters. 

Scientists, environmentalists and conservation organisations blaming states that were “dragging their feet” for the “glacial pace” of talks.

Currently, a patchwork of international bodies and treaties manage resources and human activity in areas beyond national jurisdiction – including fishing, whaling, shipping and seabed mining. Some countries, including Russia and Iceland, have called for fisheries to be excluded from the agreement.

Dr Essam Mohammed, Eritrea’s representative in the negotiations and interim director general of WorldFish, a non-profit research institute, said: “At the moment, there is a governance vacuum in the high seas, and for the ocean and developing countries, the status quo simply isn’t an option.” Swiftly advancing marine technology would lead to “an unprecedented race for marine resources in unregulated waters”, Mohammed said. “The delay in striking a deal means high risk for the health of the ocean. “All member states of the UN need to recognise the urgency to save the ocean and the people who depend on it to survive,” he said.

Prof Alex Rogers, a marine ecologist and science director of the non-profit company REV Ocean, said: “There are states here that are dragging their feet and deliberately prolonging the treaty talks. But we know the ocean is being degraded and is losing biodiversity. Climate is also having an impact on the ocean. The longer these negotiations are strung out, the more biodiversity we lose.”

Will McCallum, head of oceans at Greenpeace, who attended last week’s talks, said negotiators spent “hours and hours” on non-contentious sentences.

UN ocean treaty summit collapses as states accused of dragging out talks | Environment | The Guardian