End the War

 As with all reporting concerning the war in Ukraine readers should exercise caution upon relying upon the media. 

Around 60 Russian paratroopers have staged a mutiny and refused to fight in Ukraine, local reports say. The men, who were from key airborne forces headquarters Pskov in northern Russia, could now face jail sentences for the insubordination.

It is the latest of several alleged cases of Russian troops refusing to obey Vladimir Putin’s orders to invade Ukraine and ‘deNazify’ the country.

60 Russian soldiers ‘stage mutiny and refuse to fight in Ukraine’ (msn.com)

Quote of the Day

 “Any profiteer is free to shorten the lives of his countrymen by denying them the essentials of life and he does this as a member of a highly respected class. The police protect him and his gains against the victims. The scientist ignores the effects of starvation, filthy lodging, and lack of education upon those who made the profit possible, and rushes to help the capitalist with technical advice, medical aid or even gratuitous praise. For who but the rich can pay well, who but those who have made heavy profits endow research? 

As for religion, it merely proclaims that the oppressed will get their due in some other life, or — still more comfortingly — that they must have misbehaved in a previous birth to suffer so now. That is, they may be ignored altogether or squeezed even more painfully. The reformer, with the best of intentions, attempts to gain the benefits of a revolution without the revolution itself.”

 Professor Damodar Dharmananda Kosambi (1907—1966), mathematician, historian, philologist, and geneticist



Words of wisdom | World Socialist Party of the US (wspus.org)

Income Disparity in the UK


 The top 0.1% of earners in the UK have annual incomes in excess of £500,000.

More than 50,000 people in the top income bracket account for 6% of all earnings – 60 times greater than their population share, said the Institute for Fiscal Studies in a report covering the 10 years to 2019.

 Earnings from self-employment and business ownership were far more important for those at the top end compared with low and middle earners because income from company ownership is taxed at a lower rate than earnings from work. Business income – from either self-employment or owning and running a company – accounts for 21% of total incomes for the top 1% of adults and 29% for the top 0.1%, compared with just 9% for the rest of the population at large.

Business owner-managers could effectively choose to take income out of their company through the form of a salary, dividends, or capital gains – allowing them to benefit from lower rates of tax. The report pointed to a preferential 10% rate of capital gains tax, called business asset disposal relief, while saying that company owner-managers were able to access tax rates of just 27% on income taken in the form of capital gains.

In comparison, the average tax rate on wage earners in the top 1% is 42%. The government sets the basic rate of income tax at 20% on earnings above the tax-free personal allowance of £12,571, up to £50,270, with a rate of 40% on income above £50,271, and 45% above £150,000.

Only 2,921 people employed by local authorities in 2020-21 received more than £100,000 in total remuneration and 739 received over £150,000, 46 more than the previous year. According to the Institute for Government, just 1,560 of the 456,410 civil servants earned more than £100,000 in 2020. Across the whole civil service, the majority of staff (55%) were paid below £30,000.

UK’s top 0.1% earners have annual income of over half a million, says IFS | Business | The Guardian

About ourselves

 



What is the Socialist Party?



An independent political party that stands opposed to all others in this country, including the Labour and Communist parties. Our only links are with similar socialist parties in some other parts of the world.




What is your aim?


The replacement of the existing capitalist system of society by a new and different system we call socialism.




What is capitalism?


A system based on the ownership of the means of producing and distributing wealth (land, industry, railways, offices and the like) by a section only of society who thus form a privileged class. The others, who in return for a wage or salary produce wealth for sale with a view to profit, make up the producing or working class. In Britain less than five per cent of the population belong to the owning or capitalist class. Most people — those who work in offices as well as those who work in the factories — are in the working class.




What is socialism?


A democratic world community without frontiers based on the ownership of the means of producing and distributing wealth by society as a whole. Socialism will abolish classes and free all humanity from exploitation and oppression. The basis of socialism is this ownership of all the means of production by the whole community; control over their use will rest in the hands of the community through democratic institutions. Wealth will be produced not for sale or profit, but solely to satisfy human needs. This means the end of buying and selling and all the other financial and commercial institutions like money, prices, wages and banks. People will cooperate to produce an abundance of wealth from which they can take freely according to their needs.




Will everything belong to the State?


No. The State does not represent the whole community; it serves the interests only of those who own the means of production. State ownership or nationalisation is one of the ways in which this class controls industry. When the State takes over industries (like the railways and coalmines in Britain) it does so in their interests. State ownership leaves unchanged the class basis of society, the profit motive and the wages system, all of which socialism will abolish. Nationalisation is just State capitalism.




What system existed in the former Soviet Union?


Russian society was part of world capitalist society. It showed all the essential features of capitalism: a class who controlled the means of production through their control of political power; another class forced to work for wages; production of goods for sale with a view to profit and the accumulation of capital out of profits. The same goes for countries like China and  Cuba. They like Russia did have state capitalism.




Do you want something like the kibbutzim in Israel?


Socialism can only be a world community without frontiers. It cannot be established in one country let alone on one farm. The kibbutzim do show that human beings can live without money and can work without wages, but their small scale means that what they can offer is very restricted so that young people are tending to leave them. In practice, they have paved the way for the development of capitalism in Israel and some have themselves become capitalist institutions employing outside wage labour and producing for the market with a view to profit.




How do you advocate socialism should be established?


By the class of wage and salary earners, once a majority of them want and understand socialism, taking democratic political action to change the basis of society from the class to the common ownership of the means of production and distribution.




Why must there be a majority in favour of the change to socialism before it can be made?


Socialism, by its nature as a system involving voluntary co-operation, could only be kept going by those who really wanted it and knew what it involved. Any attempt to establish socialism without a majority first being in favour is bound to fail.




Do you repudiate undemocratic minority action to achieve socialism?


Most definitely. No leaders, however sincere or able, can lead a non-socialist working class to socialism. Leaders who take power while a majority do not understand socialism have no choice but to develop and administer capitalism, as has been shown in Russia and by the various Labour Party governments in Britain. When a majority do want and understand socialism they have no need of leaders, but only to organise themselves democratically.




Why do you advocate political action to achieve socialism?


It is their control of the machinery of government that now allows the capitalist class to protect their privileged position as the owners of the means of production. In Britain it is parliament that makes the laws granting them property rights and it is the police and the Courts, and if need be the army, that enforce these laws. The socialist majority must win political power in order to remove the protection the government machine now gives to class ownership and to carry through the establishment of the common ownership of the means of production.




How do you advocate the socialist majority should win political power?


By using their votes to elect socialist delegates to Parliament and the local councils. A socialist victory in a democratically-run election would demonstrate to all that a majority were in favour of the change to socialism.




Why are you opposed to all other political parties?


All of them accept the capitalist system and believe that current social problems can be solved within its framework.




Why do you think that reforms of the capitalist system are not the solution? 


These problems are caused by the class ownership of the means of production which all reforms leave unchanged. The policy of trying to deal with social problems one by one by reforms of capitalism is futile, as this is to deal with effects and not the cause. We call this policy “reformism” and are opposed to it.




But surely you are not against all reforms? 


We are not opposed to reforms which may bring temporary relief to some workers, but we do not regard it as the task of a socialist party to propose reforms of capitalism. Were we to do this we could easily soon become just another reformist party. To avoid this danger we advocate socialism only.




Why have all the other parties failed? 


Basically because capitalism cannot be reformed so as to work in the interests of the class of wage and salary earners. It is a class system that can only work for those who own the means of production. Any party, be it Labour or Conservative, which takes power under capitalism is forced to run that system in the only way it can be and so is inevitably brought into conflict with the mass of people who work for a wage or salary. This has been proved time and again.




So it is not because the politicians are not determined enough or are incompetent or dishonest that they fail?


No. No matter how determined or able or sincere the members of a government may be they still could not make capitalism work for the good of all. The politicians fail because they have to accept the class system which causes the problems they are always promising to solve.




If you have read this set of principles and agree with some or all of them, contact the Socialist Party with your questions and ideas about what you can do to help speed the progress toward Socialism.

The Billionaires

 



The total wealth of the world’s billionaires have dipped from a record high last year due to  drop in global stock markets since Russia’s invasion of Ukraine,  but the planet’s richest people still holding a combined $12.7tn (£9.7tn) in assets.

Elon Musk, the boss of Tesla and SpaceX, was named the world’s richest man for the first time with a $219bn fortune, up $68bn on the previous year because of the carmaker’s climbing share price. Musk leapfrogged Amazon’s Jeff Bezos.

Total wealth of world’s billionaires has fallen to $12.7tn, says Forbes | Rich lists | The Guardian

Socialist Sonnet No. 60

 

As Then, Now

 

Then Vietnam. And ‘Ho! Ho! Ho Chi Minh’

Was the chant by a hundred thousand, more,

In Grosvenor Square. Militant anti-war,

Pro Hanoi, ‘Vietcong are going to win!’

And win they did, B52s undone

By bicycles and the body bagged dead:

Surely, surely, the future would be red.

But then the reckoning, what had been won?

Low wage work and long laborious hours

As life in the red turned out to be debt

Servicing profit. Legacy of Tet

Was securing of capital’s powers.

Now Ukraine. Though sides have been rearranged,

So many dead and nothing will have changed.

 

D. A.

 

Child Poverty for Bigger Families

 The two-child policy – which limits benefits payments to the first two children born to the poorest households – would, proponents argued, cut the welfare bill and bring “feckless” parents to heel by – as one minister put it – teaching them “the reality that children cost money.”

New research, however, indicates the behavioural change aspect of the policy has dismally failed. Since its introduction exactly five years ago today, the fertility rate for third and subsequent children born to poorer families has barely fallen. Instead, the main impact of the policy has been to become the biggest single driver of child poverty.

Over 50% of children in families with more than two children will be in poverty by 2027. Removing the policy would immediately lift 250,000 children out of poverty. 

“In the absence of a behavioural fertility response to the policy, the main function of the two-child limit is to deprive families living on a low income of approximately £3,000 a year. This will inevitably lead to dramatic increases in child poverty among larger families,” said Prof Jonathan Portes.

 1.4 million children in more than 400,000 families in the UK are affected by the two-child policy. April’s below-inflation benefits rise means affected families with three children face a £983 a month shortfall in benefits, with larger families facing an even bigger hole in their income.

Sara Ogilvie of Child Poverty Action Group (CPAG) said: “The two-child limit is a brutal policy that punishes children simply for having brothers and sisters. It forces families to survive on less than they need, and with soaring living costs the hardship and hunger these families face will only intensify.”

Two-child policy hasn’t made UK families smaller, only poorer, finds report | Children | The Guardian

War resistance in Russia and Ukraine

 



Our companion party, the World Socialist Party of the United States, has posted a report on its website from the International Workers Association that it thinks worthy of a wider audience.
 

This report first appeared on April 1 in the English-language section of the website of the International Workers’ Association.

The current Russian-Ukrainian military conflict has led to a wild explosion of the most disgusting, cavernous nationalism on both sides of the front line. In Russia, they are calling to ‘crush’ the enemy, in Ukraine – to fight for the ‘fatherland’ to the last man. In both states, propaganda seeks to dehumanize the enemy as much as possible, and, unfortunately, many ordinary people fall into the trap set by those in power. Even many who claim to be ‘leftists or ‘anarchists’, intoxicated with patriotic poison, eagerly rush to support the bloodbath.

Unfortunately, this always happens in the wars waged by states. Suffice it to recall the hysteria that gripped the countries of Europe on the eve and during the first weeks of the World War One… 

All the more attention and respect are due to those people in Russia and Ukraine who resist the destruction and bloodshed. Here is a brief survey of the main kinds of anti-war protests over the month since Russian troops invaded Ukraine. 

Russia

In Russia, mass demonstrations against the war began on the very first day and did not stop for 2–3 weeks. At first, they generally took place daily and throughout the country. All were illegal and brutally dispersed. In addition to street meetings and processions, other methods have been used – hanging posters, drawing graffiti, posting leaflets and stickers, and distributing anti-war literature. In some places Molotov cocktails have been thrown through the windows of police stations and military registration and enlistment offices… 

Most protests have been spontaneous. In some instances the bourgeois liberal opposition called for protests. So did feminist organizations on March 8. Unfortunately, not all of the protesters can be considered truly anti-war, that is, truly opposed to all belligerents. Especially among the liberal protesters there are many supporters of Ukraine; even NATO sympathizers have been spotted. 

The exact number of protesters is unknown, but the number of cities in which demonstrations took place and the number of people detained during the protests indicate their scale. In total, street actions have taken place in more than 100 cities and towns. According to human rights activists, by March 13 alone the police had arrested about 15,000 people at these protests. A few are released simply ‘with a warning’; thousands of others have been fined or charged with administrative offenses. By March 25 in St. Petersburg alone the courts had heard 3,710 cases: 861 people were fined, 2,456 were charged with administrative offenses, and 123 were sentenced to forced labor.

Some protesters face criminal charges. The new laws against ‘spreading false information’ and ‘discrediting the army’ carry prison sentences of up to 15 years. In the month since the outbreak of hostilities, 46 people in Russia have been indicted on criminal charges. Nine of them are in custody and three are under house arrest. At least five of the accused are outside Russia. In total, cases were initiated in 22 regions of Russia: Adygea, Tatarstan, Karelia, Moscow City, Ingushetia, St. Petersburg, Kemerovo, Tomsk, Tyumen, Belgorod, Vladimir, Moscow, Tula, Sverdlovsk, Pskov, Samara, Rostov, and Novosibirsk regions, Crimea, and the Primorsky, Krasnodar, and Trans-Baikal Territories. Criminal cases are being investigated under 14 Articles of the Criminal Code — 10 under the new Article 207.3 on ‘public dissemination of false information about actions of the armed forces’, 9 (including at least 3 street artists) — under Article 214 (Part 2) on ‘vandalism motivated by hatred’, 9 — under Article 318 (Part 1) on violence against a representative of the authorities, 2 — on charges of ‘justifying terrorism’. In addition, cases of hooliganism, insulting a representative of the authorities, calling for extremist activities, inciting hostility or riots, storing ammunition, and even desecration of the bodies of the dead and their burial places are under investigation.

Ukraine

In Ukraine, anti-war protests are no less difficult than in Russia. In addition to repression by the authorities, who have begun to ban and arrest political opponents and adopt terrorist laws (including punishments from 15 years in prison to life imprisonment for ‘collaboration with the aggressor’, ‘looting’, and ‘high treason’), wartime conditions themselves prevent protests. How can people attend street actions under a hail of Russian missiles and shells? However, even here it is possible, based on fragmentary information, to present at least a general picture. 

One of the most common actions objectively directed against the consequences of a military conflict is so-called ‘looting’, numerous cases of which are reported from many cities of Ukraine. Of course, a variety of incidents are included in this category — from banditry, murder, and robbery of civilians to real social protest, when residents left without food and other essential goods simply expropriate them from stores. Such ‘popular expropriations’ and ‘hunger riots’ were noted both in cities controlled by the Ukrainian authorities and in those occupied by Russian troops. 

Residents have attempted peacefully to stop the entry of Russian military equipment into urban areas in order to avoid destruction. Thus in Koryukovka (Chernihiv region) on February 27 local residents came out to meet Russian tanks, stopped the column, and entered into negotiations with the troops. As a result, they agreed not to enter the city.

On March 26, the mayor of the Ukrainian city of Slavutych held talks with Russian troops that had entered the city and agreed with them on demilitarization. He assured them that there were no soldiers and weapons in the city and persuaded the soldiers to leave. The Russian military ‘will not search houses’ but people must voluntarily hand over non-hunting weapons. Local Ukrainian authorities remain in Slavutych and will receive humanitarian aid from the Russian side.

There is also evidence of residents –- in Kharkov, for instance — demanding that the Ukrainian military not place military equipment in the areas where they live. 

Disobedience and desertion

Many rumors are circulating about disobedience to orders and desertion on both sides. Unfortunately, there is no way to verify them. The media mention low morale and little desire to fight in the Russian military units sent to Ukraine.

The Ukrainian side claim that about 200 Russian marines from the 155th Brigade refused to take part in military operations. It has also been reported that military personnel of the 810th Marine Brigade, stationed in the Crimea, refused to take part in a landing in the Odessa area. 

There are other fragmentary reports that do not allow us to judge the scale of these phenomena. The mother of a soldier assigned to a unit in the Leningrad region said that her son, like many others who were drafted into the army, was forced to sign a contract with the army. In January the unit was sent to Kursk, then to Belgorod, and then they began to be sent to fight in Ukraine. ‘According to the woman, the soldiers are taken to Ukraine to fight, but some of them refuse and are threatened with charges of desertion.’

A contract soldier from Ufa, Albert Sakhibgareyev, said that his brigade, while on exercises in the Belgorod region at the end of February, received machine guns and an order to fire from artillery mounts ‘where they were ordered.’ The soldiers began to doubt that they were in training when return shots flew in their direction. After that, Sakhibgareyev looked at the news on his mobile phone and found out that Russia had sent troops to Ukraine. A week later, he was beaten by an ensign, left the unit and returned home to Ufa. For desertion, he could face up to 7 years in prison.

Twelve troops of the Russian Guard from the Krasnodar Territory OMON [special police], together with their commander Farid Chitayev, refused to enter the Crimea. They explained that they refused to execute an illegal order. None of them had been informed about the tasks of the ‘special operation’ or agreed to participate in it. They were dismissed from service. 

Several troops from the Izhevsk OMON, after the destruction of their platoon together with its heavy equipment, left the territory of Ukraine and submitted their resignations. 

At the end of March, the former President of South Ossetia acknowledged that some of the soldiers recruited in this republic to take part in hostilities in Ukraine had returned home from the front without permission… 

Nor is everyone in Ukraine eager to ‘defend the fatherland.’ This is evidenced by posters seen in the early days of the conflict in Odessa. On these posters the command of the Armed Forces of Ukraine sternly asks: ‘You do not want to fight? That means you don’t love your country.’ The very appearance of such posters testifies to the fact that there are quite a few such reluctant fighters. 

The Ukrainian authorities have announced mobilization and do not let men aged 18 to 60 leave the country. Nevertheless, as comrades from Ukraine report, in reality large-scale mobilization is not occurring — in contrast to 2014–2015, when mass raids on those liable for military service in Ukraine were commonplace. During the first week of hostilities they tried to hand out subpoenas at checkpoints, but this was later declared illegal.

However, many men, just to be on the safe side, try to cross the borders into neighboring countries illegally. A BBC Ukrainian correspondent in early March said that at the Mogilev-Podolsky checkpoint on the border with Moldova ‘in every second car, if not in every car, there were men of military age trying to go abroad, but they were turned around… As the border guard told me, some cars simply turned around, in some the women got behind the wheel, and the men left.’ 

According to a deputy of the city council of Mukachevo in Transcarpathia, every day hundreds of men, in defiance of martial law, pay to cross the border with the EU countries. In Transcarpathia this shadow business has already reached an industrial scale. The cost of a certificate and transfer to Poland goes as high as 2,000 euros. In the Odessa region the cost was $1,500 per person. Edition LIGA.net, which has studied the ‘market’, cites sums dozens of times larger. According to the Ukrainian Border Service, over 1,000 men of military age were caught on the border during 21 days of the conflict. Those fleeing the war go to Poland, Romania, Moldova, and – in fewer numbers — Hungary.

Of course, not all the men seeking to leave the country illegally should be considered people who simply do not want to fight. There are many rich people among them, since finding such money to pay for crossing the border is not an easy task. Some may have to sell everything they possess, but the rich do not care. They start and provoke wars and then safely hide abroad, leaving ordinary people to die and kill for them. This is also true of that part of the Russian ‘elite’ which has emigrated.

As of March 28, over 340 people in Ukraine have been charged with criminal offenses that ‘reduce the defense capability of Ukraine under martial law’. About 100 of them are charged with high treason or collaboration. Over 1,700 male citizens of Ukraine of draft age have been identified who tried to cross the border of the country illegally. This was announced by the Communications Adviser of the State Bureau of Investigation Tatyana Sapyan. In the last 24 hours alone, channels for transporting people across the border have been exposed in the Vinnitsa, Chernivtsi, Odessa, and Lviv areas.  

In an attempt to suppress desertion, the authorities submitted Bill No. 7171 to the Verkhovna Rada [Supreme Council]. It threatens men of military age who illegally leave Ukraine under martial law with up to 10 years’ imprisonment. 

Finally, residents of the separatist Donetsk People’s Republic report forced mobilization there. Men are seized right on the streets, given weapons, and sent to the front with no training. Those who can try to hide at home and not go out. That is another way to resist the war!

Source:  https://aitrus.info/node/5941

Note.  I have improved the translation here and there and omitted links, superfluous detail, and a couple of passages that express attitudes not fully shared by the World Socialist Movement. Stefan

War resistance in Russia and Ukraine | World Socialist Party of the US (wspus.org)

No more dying for ‘your’ country

 


Workers have no country and patriotism is a delusion and nationalism is a snare. Working people have no country of their own. Their land is the property of a master class and the worker rarely owns enough for his or her coffin. What matters is the name of the country of your birth, if you are a slave in that country? Patriotism requires allegiance to the flag, which means obedience and readiness to kill another father, mother, brother, or sister.


When hands clasp across national boundaries in solidarity the workers will know that borders and nations have no meaning or significance for them. These two, nationalism and international socialism (and there can be no socialism that is not international) are opposite as the poles, as antagonistic as fire and water. When patriotism and socialism enter the worker’s mind, patriotism will be quenched or socialism will evaporate. The socialist patriot is an impossibility. If any is loyal to those in the class that exploits, he or she is a traitor to our own class. Workers own no country, so why should we care which section of the class of thieves owns which national portion? Workers have a world to win, not nations to fight for.


Patriotism groups men and women according to their land of origin, as decided by the vicissitudes of history; within every country, thanks to the patriotic link, rich and poor unite against the foreigner. Socialism, in contrast, groups all people, poor against rich, class against class, without taking into account the differences of race and language, and over and above the frontiers determined by the fortunes and misfortunes of history.


The Socialist Party are anti-patriots but let it be clearly understood that that love of one’s native village or familiarity with a town is not the type of patriotism to be condemned. What we denounce are jingoism and nationalism, that is not natural sentiments, but prejudices very firmly implanted into the heads of people. We, who hate the existing nation-states, retain a soft little spot for where we were born and raised. Neither have we ever maintained that there are not, throughout the existing nations, some noticeable differences of character and temperament such as have been caused by history and culture. Countries have had their raison d’être at a time and the best proof of it is that they were born and that they have endured; we even think that their existence, at certain periods and in certain circumstances, may even have contributed to the general improvement of our species. True patriotism seeks the welfare of each in the happiness of all. One time in the past the term patriot meant to be opposed to the governing class of your country in the interests of the people of your country. Patriotism consisted in opposing the powers that were against the interests of the people. Patriotism has now lost that meaning in small communities where once the cohesive principle of all for each and each for all had significance. When workers are primarily concerned with the direction of their own affairs, managing their own work-place and running their own communities and neighbourhoods, independent for practical purposes, distant territorial claims for allegiance will not easily find a “patriotic” echo

 

 Patriotism assumes that our planet is divided into little regions, each one surrounded by a wall and an iron gate. Those who have had the fortune of being born inside these walls consider themselves better than those living outside. Such a belief poison the minds of the children and if need be the sacrifice of children in wars. The Socialist Party finds nothing reasonable to inspire any of our fellow-workers in the thought that they are slaves of one governmental system run by their masters rather than another and a rival one. Hence our adoption of the slogan “Proletarians of all lands unite.”



Let us do away with nationalism, patriotism and national chauvinism altogether and substitute in its place the “ internationalism” of the class-conscious worker. It is not a question of fighting for the political independence of one nation, but for a new society for all lands – for the socialist commonwealth.

Women’s Work?

 “Women are the creatures of an organised tyranny of men, as workers are the creatures of an organised tyranny of idlers.”Eleanor Marx

Half of working-age women are providing an average of 45 hours of unpaid care every week, while a quarter of men do17 hours.

Every year women in the UK are providing 23.2bn hours of unpaid childcare care worth an estimated £382bn, while men provide 9.7bn worth £160bn, according to the thinktank Centre for Progressive Policy.

Calling unpaid work “one of the driving forces of gender-based inequalities in the workplace”, the CPP found that caring responsibilities “disproportionately impact women and exacerbate workplace inequality”.

Almost half of working-age women in UK do 45 hours of unpaid care a week – study (yahoo.com)