Extracts translated from Description du monde de demain. Un monde sans monnaie ni troc ni échange: une civilisation de l’accès (Description of the World of Tomorrow. A World Without Money or Barter or Exchange: a Civilisation of Free Access) by Jean-Francois Aupetitgendre and Marc Chinal (Editions Réfléchir n’a Jamais Tué Personne, Lyons, 2021)

‘Nothing in this society escapes the imprint of money. It follows from this that wanting to abolish money is to be obliged to think differently about absolutely everything, our very notions of time and space included.’ (p.16)

‘A society of free access would give freedom of choice to all those who currently find themselves in intolerable situations…. In the current system of society moving house to escape from a violent partner, for example, is a real battle if the person cannot show they have gainful employment and does not have money for a deposit on new accommodation. Such victims, without the capitalist ‘get-out’ of financial independence, find themselves trapped. The same thing applies to all the situations brought to the public gaze by the “Me too’ movement. Why would a woman give in to the unwelcome advances of a boss if she did not fear losing out in some way? What pressure could the predator exert if his prospective victim already had free access to everything he might have to offer?’ (p.23)      

‘In a society of free access, all human activities will be chosen by the person doing them and will not bring with them any particular advantages, material benefits, or payment of any kind. Questions around equal reward or prestige will simply not apply. It’s the end of the road for the little Hitler, the office dictator, the ‘prestigious’ role, higher or lower pay.’ (p.23)

 ‘All our technological choices, past and present, are distorted by the buying and selling system and the absolute necessity in all its workings to turn a financial profit.’ (p.34)

‘Let’s imagine that there’s no longer any ownership of the means of production, no more patents, no more “intellectual property”, that every innovation is immediately commonly owned, that there are no longer any brand names to be defended against others, no more fancy advertising.  If we take what’s best in every make of washing machine, car or computer, would we not be able to make all manufactured objects wholly practical, indestructible and resource-light and at a environmentally minimal cost, and to manufacture only the number we need as we need them? How much less destruction and waste if we can finally make money obsolete!’ (p.36)

‘[In a moneyless society] some of the situations that cause violence would still certainly exist: envy, jealousy or frustration can lead to violence, but far less so than the acquisitive pressure current society exerts. An easy test is to look at official statistics and the reasons for incarceration. A quick calculation shows that at least two thirds of crimes are directly attributable to the money system.’ (p.40)

‘Free access is not an exchange economy and is regulated only by the availability of stock, by the ongoing supply of goods, and also by their impact on the environment, all things which concern equally all members of society’’ (p.55)

‘A society of free access by its very nature is a society without commercial imperatives or economic competition. And even the most able will be aware that they need the cooperation of the less able. If conflicts of interests do arise, new methods will emerge to resolve them, with conciliation rather than confrontation the order of the day.’ (p.63)

‘Campaigners who seek alternative methods of organising capitalism believing that they are being more  realistic may well get a shock one day when they realise that all they have done has been to prolong the agony of buying and selling society and hold back the consciousness of so many people.’ (64)

‘The problem is not solved if we aim at the wrong target, at the wrong enemy, if, in thinking we are fighting against capitalism, all we are doing in fact is alleviating some of its worst effects. The point is not to somehow manage capital better but to abolish it, and at the same time the exchange mechanism which is fundamental to it.’ (p.65)

‘Wanting to create an egalitarian, ecologically sound, peaceful society without free access is like wanting to build a car without inventing the wheel.’ (p.66)

‘The only true realists, the only true pragmatists, are those who want to abolish once and for all money, the  state, the market, commodities, the wage and salary system, exchange value and above all the need to turn a financial profit.’ (p.69)

‘[Free access society] will have no state with governments having overwhelming power for the length of their mandate but, instead, representatives elected for specific purposes and readily recallable by the majority. We are often told that such a system would be certain to be long-winded, confrontational and slow …..But a slowly taken decision involving consequences for millions should be a guarantee of quality. And the fact that there will no longer be “professional” politicians but rather delegates elected or appointed for a specific purpose and with a particular mandate will guard against power being taken by individuals or parties.’ (p.82)

‘In present society, absolutely anything can be bought and sold, whether it’s time, knowledge, virginity, or even human organs.’ (p.107)

‘Money is a tool of exchange, but also, wherever we care to look, a tool of exclusion.’ (p.111)

‘We are not talking about returning to a “pre-monetary” world but about using our current knowledge to build a “post-monetary” world, transcending the primitive system of exchange, and getting to a world of comfortable abundance and free access.’ (p.129)

‘A society with commercial goals needs citizens to constantly consume, to fall into the traps laid by manipulative advertising; it needs citizens who are frustrated in their everyday lives and who can be made to believe that happiness comes from purchasing the latest product or service.’ (p.142)

‘Any belief in human solidarity in a monetary world is based on a misconceived vision of that system, even if  associative activities do, despite everything, sometimes take place. But real ongoing solidarity in a monetary world is simply an illusion.’ (p.148-9)

‘Is some form of universal basic income a solution to the problems of the capitalist system? Definitely not.’ (p.170)

‘Real direct democracy does not consist in giving power to those who speak the most eloquently or the loudest. Nor does it open the door to armed or deranged groups of people. The only political arrangement  possible for a post-monetary system is to give to each person equal responsibility and equal access to knowledge and training as well as to decision-making.’ (p.187)

‘An efficient society is one that knows its limits, one that, instead of constantly seeking economic growth, focuses on satisfying everyone’s needs. Once these needs are satisfied, ‘economic growth’ for the sake of it serves no purpose. Once a washing machine is made truly to last, with the means to repair it available if it does break down available, there is no point in continuing to make more of them. Energies need to go into something else. Production responds to need. That is true efficiency.’ (p.191)

‘[Even in capitalism, people know that] a truly good occupation is not one that gives you the most material gain, but one that is socially useful. ’ (p.194)

‘Think of all the occupations directly or indirectly tied to the use of money: banks, insurance, accountancy, taxation, financial administration, commercial law ….. All these occupations will disappear immediately in a post-monetary system.’ (p.205)

‘A society of free access is founded on real direct democracy with each citizen needing to be conscious of this in order to make “reciprocity” function. It follows that any kind of armed or authoritarian revolution is completely incompatible with this vision. Armed or violent revolutions need sheep to send to the slaughter and obedience to leaders. The development towards a free access society needs human beings with clarity of consciousness.’ (p.216)

‘A free access society is not impossible. What is impossible is for us to continue to survive in a world which is poisonous and being poisoned and will continue to be so. What is impossible is to live in harmony in a world where the aim is to compete with our neighbours near and far just to have the means to live decently, a world where supplying armaments is a highly printable pursuit. When a society is harmful, the rules of operation must be changed.’ (p.274)

 

‘When in the society we are aiming for we will have finished repairing the mistakes of the past, then we will no doubt turn towards what we still do not have and we will go further. But we will do this in respecting the environment and the planet’s living beings and without forgetting that we do have limits but that respecting those is no real problem.’ (p.283).

 Haiti, the poorest country in the western hemisphere, has promoted itself as a cheap and available destination for US clothing brands seeking low-cost suppliers that can take advantage of 2006 legislation that allows duty-free entry for goods made there by US companies.

The government has not raised the minimum wage since 2019, despite inflation of more than 15%. The country is experiencing catastrophic levels of insecurity and political instability after the assassination of President Jovenel Moïse last year. As a result, food and fuel prices have escalated. Unions are fighting for an increase in the minimum daily wage of garment workers from 500 to 1,500 gourdes ($5-15).

About 60,000 Haitians work in one of the country’s 41 garment factories, producing clothes for more than 60 American companies.

Yet activists say conditions at the factories are akin to prison camps, with non-existent labour rights and where sexual abuse is rife.

“Workers are not considered as humans or as needing rights,” says Yannick Etienne, of the workers’ rights organisation Batay Ouvriye. “The pay is so low that it puts women in situations where they have to accept [forced] sex in order to pay their rent.”

Female garment factory workers the Guardian spoke to confirm that to get a job – which has become harder because so many people are looking for work – women are expected to have sex with a male manager.

“If you don’t accept to have sex with the manager, your application will be rejected,” one worker says, adding that she works on a line that produces 3,600 T-shirts a day. “You must oblige or you won’t have a job, and also if you want a promotion, you must have sex with your supervisor.”

Workers interviewed by the Guardian also spoke of having to use rags as sanitary towels because they could not afford to buy their own.

Rose-Myrtha Louis, a coordinator at the Haitian Workers’ Renovation Syndicate, said: “We are supposed to have access to pads, but we have to use waste from T-shirts [because] we don’t have enough money. It has given us infections. It’s just another way we are suffering.”

A 2021 report from Better Work Haiti, a labour compliance group backed by the International Labour Organization and the World Bank, found that 80% of workers and their families have had to cut down on meals. It also found that 96% of factories surveyed failed to comply with Haiti’s health insurance and social security contribution requirements, putting workers’ lives at risk.

“When you consider the price that the clothes are sold for, and the wages we receive, it’s as if we are selling our blood,” explained Marie, one of the workers.

Sex for a job: the scandal of Haiti’s exploited US garment workers | Haiti | The Guardian

 

We believe it is worthwhile for all workers to consider our case very carefully. You will find it unique. The Socialist Party is fundamentally different from all other political parties.

We intend to fight every election on the same platform as we have done in the past, that is, on the straight issue of socialism or capitalism. We do not indulge in ballyhoo or electioneering stunts. We appeal to your understanding and intelligence, and not to your emotions and prejudices.

Who are the Working Class?

The Socialist Party is very particular about the accurate use of such words, therefore let us define what we mean when we use this term. By a worker, we mean all those men and women who because they own little but their ability to work, must sell this ability for wages. Whether you be a doctor or a docker, a university professor or a street sweeper. If you have to work in order to live, you are a member of the working class.

Who are the Capitalist Class?

90 per cent of Britain’s wealth is owned by less than 10 per cent, of the country’s population. This group owns the means of producing and distributing wealth (i.e., the factories, the workshops, transport, etc.). Because they own these things they do not have to work for wages. Their income comes from rent, interest and profit which all come from the difference between what the working class produces and what they receive in wages. In other words, the capitalist class live on the unpaid labour of the working class.

Cause of all our problems

We intend to show the socialist attitude to such questions as poverty, housing, war and rates. To really get to know the socialist position we strongly advise you to attend our meetings and read our literature. Basically the position is that all the social problems confronting the worker today are the product of the type of world we live in. We call this society capitalism, i.e., a society that has a working class producing all the wealth but only receiving back a small proportion of this wealth in wages, and a capitalist class living in ease and plenty on the exploitation of the worker.

Poverty—Its Cause

At every election the reformist politicians promise to abolish the poverty of the worker, but despite these promises, we are still poor. We who produce the ocean-going luxury yachts must be content with a day’s outing on the river. We who build the mansions and the palaces must be content with a council house. We who toil all week in the factory, office, shipyard and warehouse, must content ourselves with the cheap and the shoddy yet produce all the beautiful articles for our parasitic masters to enjoy. While we have a subject class working for wages and a ruling class living on the workers’ labour, there will always be poverty despite the sugar-coated promises of the politicians.

Housing and you

There is no doubt that in the political messages you receive from our opponents, you will find a part dealing with housing. Rosy promises will be offered in this matter. We ask you to consider this question a little more carefully than in the past. Observe that all our opponents speak of a housing problem. This is rubbish. There is no housing problem. Any worker can have a house tomorrow just by using the phone. Building firms advertise in every newspaper begging people to buy houses. The only thing that stops a worker from getting a house is his poverty. If you have the money you can have any house you desire. The thousands of workers clamouring for houses are not suffering from a housing problem but a poverty problem. While capitalism lasts, the worker will always suffer poverty. Don’t be taken in by the politicians’ promise of a new house. You can’t live on a promise.

War and the Worker

Inside capitalism, everything is produced for a profit. But to realise a profit, the commodity has to be sold. To sell goods abroad is essential for any capitalist country. In attempting to beat down competition from other sellers, the various governments threaten and bluster. But when the threats fail they go to war. Wars are fought for economic reasons, for markets, for sources of raw material, and for trade routes and military bases. The working class of the world own little but their ability to work. Wars are won by one capitalist group over another. Remember our opponents supported wars in the past and will do so again. Only the Socialist Party has taken the correct working-class standpoint on this issue—that is, wars are fought for economic reasons and workers have nothing to gain in fighting their masters’ battles.

The Fraud of Taxes 

At every election the reformers make a great fuss about council tax, business rates and local government spending. We state categorically that this has nothing to do with the working class. A rise or fall in taxes would benefit certain sections of the capitalist class and injure other sections, but basically, it would not alter the position of the worker. We would still be as poor no matter the level of taxes. Don’t be taken in by the job-hunting would-be politicians. It has nothing to do with you.

Our Opponents

All the political parties claim to be different. Progressives talk about a new broom sweeping clean. The Labour Party talk about their democratic socialism, and the Green Party about their reforms of the monetary system. The Scottish nationalists claim what is needed is sovereignty. The Lib-Dems and the Leftists, all of them claim to have a solution to your problems. We ask you to examine all their programmes—one thing will strike you forcibly. Despite all their various claims, when you examine them, you will find they have all something in common. All of them think that capitalism can be reformed in the workers’ interests. All they ask is your vote and they claim everything will be all right. None of them wants to change capitalism to socialism. All of them support the continuance of capitalism.

It may be objected that such parties as the Labour and the left-wing parties have the interests of the working class at heart. After all, they claim to be socialist. How true is this claim? The Labour Party have been in power for many years. Has this fundamentally altered your position as workers? The Labour Party has broken strikes and supported a wage freeze, conscription and war. Are these working-class actions? They say that nationalisation is socialism, but this is a lie. State control has been introduced and supported by the Conservatives when it suits them, and likewise by the Labour Party. It is just another form or method for running capitalism. Whether the industry is nationalised or not, you still have workers and capitalists; exploited and exploiter.



The Non-Socialist Socialists

Unlike the Labour and other reformist organisations, we make no promises. The Socialist Party was formed in 1904 with one object: That is, the establishment of socialism. This can only be brought about by the majority of the working class understanding and desiring socialism. We make no claim to be leaders, for only when the working class understand what socialism is, will capitalism be abolished.

What is Capitalism?

· A world where the workers produce all the wealth yet live in poverty and insecurity.

· A world that burns wealth to keep up prices while a third of the world starves.

· A world that lives in perpetual fear of war.

· A world where a handful live in ease and affluence on the misery of the majority.

· A world that causes worker to oppose worker in the quest of a living.

· A world where men are dehumanised and degraded for the insatiable greed of capital.

What is Socialism ?

· A world where the means of living will be owned in common.

· A world where everything will be produced for use and not for profit.

· A world where war, crime, unemployment and poverty will be impossible.

· A world where everyone will produce according to their ability and take according to their needs.

· Socialism is a new social system.

 

There will be no owners or non-owners. As everything will be owned in common there will be no money, banks, stock exchanges or insurance companies. Today, perhaps as many as four-fifths are doing work that would be completely useless under socialism (e.g., ticket collectors, members of the armed forces, bank clerks, etc.). This means they will be able to do productive work for the first time and this should greatly decrease the working day.

We make no promises

Socialism is not a dream. It is a historic development and can become a reality as soon as you, the worker, understand and desire it. The real dreamers today are those who think you can have capitalism without wars, poverty and unemployment.

The Socialist Party does not beg for your vote on any reform. If, in fact, you want some reform of the present social system, then your vote is not for the Socialist Party

What it stresses, again and again, is that in order to bring about socialism the majority must understand it. If you understand and desire socialism if you are aware that capitalism can never operate for the benefit of the working class, then you will be aware that support for any of our opponents is a vote for the retention of capitalism and a vote for the Socialist Party is a vote registering your protest against capitalism, a vote for socialism—the new world.

 

4,000 grassroots activists, members and supporters of labor unions who attended the Labor Notes conference in Chicago from June 17 to 19.

“I think we have the opportunity to make the word ‘union’ no longer some taboo word that we’re afraid to say in the workplace,” said Kylah Clay, organizer with Starbucks Workers United.

Since the 1980s, the American labor movement has been in decline. Over the past two years, however, there are signs that US labor may be reviving.

“As someone who’s studied labor issues for the last 30 years or so, I’ve never seen anything like it in terms of the level of interest and excitement from people who want to fight back at the workplace,” said Stephanie Luce, a professor of labor studies at the CUNY School of Labor and Urban Studies. According to Luce, the US labor situation is bad, with weak labor laws that are hard to enforce. “What’s happening, is people are finally just cracking and saying, ‘That’s it.'”

Union popularity is at its highest since 1965 according to US pollster Gallup.

A rise in private sector strikes at companies like John Deere, Kelloggs and Nabisco last fall — termed “Striketober” — indicates a renewed willingness by workers to participate in workplace actions. Unorganized workers are also making headway. Starbucks, Amazon and also recently Apple workers have led stunning wins in their workplaces, which were previously considered unorganizable. 

Labor union activists hope union wins at Starbucks and Amazon will inspire labor organizing across industries around the country, and potentially raise labor standards in their sectors. “We win a contract, guess how much better the other contracts in this country are going to be?” Amazon Labor Union (ALU) President Chris Smalls explained.

In the US, organizing campaigns by large unions have typically been top-down efforts, in which unorganized workers follow the lead of union staff organizers. Recently, the most exciting victories have flipped this relationship: Union staff support and follow the lead of the workers as the main organizers of the workplace.  the union victory at the Staten Island Amazon facility came from the workers themselves “having one-on-one conversations with workers, disrupting captive audience meetings.”

Captive audience meetings are mandatory meetings for employees in which employers express their opinions about unions, often with assistance from hired anti-union consultants. Having workers in the meetings to call out any informational inaccuracies or to express their pro-union sentiment was a major boon to the effort.  It also emphasized the importance of organizers having a presence in break rooms. “It gave us the opportunity to talk to workers, to make it clear being pro-union is not something that will get you fired.”

Labor Notes 2022: US workers are pushing unions into the mainstream | Business | Economy and finance news from a German perspective | DW | 22.06.2022

Dispute

 

There is always a need to modernise,

Old ways of working are superseded,

Without real change progress is impeded;

It’s in novel thinking the future lies.

Technology advances to the point

Of labour not being so laborious,

Could work even become glorious

And not something that puts life out of joint?

Who would resist choosing a better way

Once the consensus has been apprized

That benefits commonly realised

Resolve issues of poverty and pay?

But for now, workers are forced to dispute

Changes capital wants to institute.

 

D. A.

 There is no food shortage. According to a May 6, 2022 report by the United Nations Food and Agriculture Organization (FAO), the world enjoys “a relatively comfortable supply level” of cereals. This is confirmed by the World Bank, which noted that global stocks of cereals are at historically high levels and that about three-quarters of Russian and Ukrainian wheat exports had already been delivered before the war started.

These numbers are consistent with data from the Ukrainian Ministry of Agriculture that reported on May 19 that the country exported 46.51 million tons of cereals in the 2021/22 season, versus 40.85 million the previous year.

In a repeat of 2007-2008 food crisis, it is speculation which is the key factor behind the current rise in food prices in international markets. As reported by the Lighthouse Reports, “speculators have flooded commodity markets in attempts to make a profit out of escalating prices.” A striking example are two top commodity-linked “exchange traded funds” (ETFs) which have received US$1.2 billion of investments – compared to just US$197 million for the whole of 2021 – a 600 percent increase.

Olivier De Schutter, UN Special Rapporteur on Extreme Poverty and Human Rights, has observed that “speculative activity by powerful institutional investors who are generally unconcerned with agricultural market fundamentals are indeed betting on hunger, and exacerbating it.”

According to the New York Times, “in April, speculators were responsible for 72 percent of the buying activity on the Paris wheat market, up from 25 percent before the pandemic.” 

Instead of food shortage, the reality is that the world produces far more food than we eat. Over 33 percent of the food produced globally is used for animal feed as well as for other non-food uses, mainly agro-fuels.

The US produces roughly 400 million tons of corn, but over 40 percent of this amount – 160 million tons – goes to ethanol production, while another 40 percent goes to animal feed, and only 10 percent is used as food whereas another 10 percent is exported. India was not expected to export more than 10 million tons of wheat in 2022-2023, which is insignificant in comparison to the US numbers.

The increasing amount of food diverted to the production of agro-fuels – again as in the 2007-2008 crisis – is another major factor fueling tension in the global cereal markets. As noted in a 2009 analysis, “although biofuels still account for only 1.5 percent of the global liquid fuels supply, they accounted for almost half the increase in the consumption of major food crops in 2006–07, mostly because of corn-based ethanol produced in the United States.”

In the US, ethanol production increased from 3.6 million barrels in 2001 to over 102 million in 2019. Despite the fact that ethanol is at least 24 percent more carbon-intensive than gasoline, under pressure from the Congress and the industry, the Biden administration has just taken steps to encourage further ethanol production while continuing to heavily subsidize it. The US government-funded ethanol industry uses the equivalent of 35 percent of the global world trade of cereals of 473 million tons. 

 Neverthless, even in the absence of a global food shortage, the food crisis is real. Droughts, conflicts, and now high food prices, are threatening to starve hundreds of millions of people. The massive human suffering and hunger that was affecting many countries even prior to the war in Ukraine was barely met with adequate response from rich nations. UN humanitarian appeals for acute crises are chronically underfunded. In 2021, only 45 percent of the UN appeal for Yemen and the Horn of Africa was fulfilled, only 29 percent for Syria.

The US Congress just approved an aid of US$40 billion for Ukraine, including over US$26 billion of military aid. This is US$12 billion more than the US$28 billion that the US will spend globally in 2022 on international assistance through USAID.

A Global Food Crisis: Shortage Amidst Plenty | Inter Press Service (ipsnews.net)

 Ecuador can be added to the increasing list of countries such as Sri Lanka that now have failing economies. The capital, Quito, is experiencing food and fuel shortages after 10 days of demonstrations in which protesters at times have clashed with police. After officials rejected the conditions for negotiations, the United States government issued an advisory urging travellers to reconsider visiting the country due to “civil unrest and crime”.

Demonstrations led primarily by the Indigenous organization Confederation of Indigenous Nationalities of Ecuador (Conaie), began on 14 June to demand that gasoline prices be cut by 45 cents a gallon to $2.10, price controls for agricultural products and a larger budget for education. The protests began with peaceful roadblocks but levels of violence have escalated in parts of the country prompting conservative ex-banker Lasso to decree a state of exception – martial control – in six provinces. The Indigenous leader Leonidas Iza on Tuesday demanded – among other things – that the government eliminate the state of emergency decree and remove the military and police presence around places where protesters have gathered.

Ecuador facing food and fuel shortages as country rocked by violent protests | Ecuador | The Guardian

In Somalia aid workers report children starving to death “before our eyes.” According to the latest assessment for Somalia, an estimated 1.5 million under-fives face acute malnutrition by the end of the year. Those numbers are only expected to go up.

Michael Dunford, the World Food Programme’s (WFP) regional director for east Africa, said governments had to donate urgently and generously if there was to be any hope of avoiding catastrophe in the Horn of Africa country. 

“We need money and we need it now,” said Dunford. “Will we able to avert [a famine in Somalia]? Unless there is … a massive scaling-up from right now, it won’t be possible, quite frankly. The only way, at this point, is if there is a massive investment in humanitarian relief, and all the stakeholders, all the partners, come together to try to avert this.”

Across the whole of east Africa, 89 million people are now considered “acutely food insecure” by the WFP, a number that has grown by almost 90% in the past year.

“Unfortunately, I do not see that rate of growth slowing down. If anything, it seems to be accelerating,” said Dunford. He explains inadequate funding had hampered efforts to learn from the 2011 famine. “We are seeing children dying before our eyes, seeing populations that have lost their livelihoods. It’s not that we didn’t learn the lessons of 2011; there was a lot of very good learning from that crisis. It’s just we haven’t been able to implement it to the extent required because of the lack of funding.”

 Claire Sanford, deputy humanitarian director of Save the Children, said, “I can honestly say in my 23 years of responding to humanitarian crisis, this is by far the worst I’ve seen, particularly in terms of the level of impact on children,” she said. “The starvation that my colleagues and I witnessed in Somalia has escalated even faster than we feared.” She added, “We have genuinely failed as an international community that we have allowed the situation to get to the extent it is at the moment. In 2011, we vowed as a community that we would never, ever let this happen again. And yet we have failed in that promise,” she added.

In April, the UN had received only 3% of funds for its $6bn appeal for Ethiopia, Somalia and South Sudan.

Somalia: ‘The worst humanitarian crisis we’ve ever seen’ | Global development | The Guardian

 

Just because we don’t support the Russian invasion does not mean that we, therefore, support the Ukrainian army. We are against both sides, Ukrainian capitalism as well as Russian imperialism. The war is not worth the sacrifice of a single worker’s life. The orgy of death and destruction which is now convulsing unfortunate Europe was caused by the conflict of capitalist interests. In each of these countries, the workers were oppressed and exploited. They produced enormous wealth but the bulk of it was withheld from them by the owners of the industries. 

The Socialist Party  in the present grave crisis solemnly reaffirms its allegiance to the principle of internationalism and working-class solidarity the world over, and proclaims its unalterable opposition to all war. Modern wars as a rule have been caused by the commercial and financial rivalry and intrigues of the capitalist interests in the different countries. Whether they have been frankly waged as wars of aggression or have been hypocritically represented as wars of “defence,” they have always been made by the ruling classes and fought by the working people. Wars bring wealth and power to the ruling classes, and suffering and death to the workers.  Wars are sinister and breeds unreason and hatred. They obscure the struggles of the workers for life, liberty, and social justice. They tend to sever the vital bonds of solidarity between them and their brothers in other countries, destroy their organisations and curtail their civic and political rights and liberties.

The Socialist Party is unalterably opposed to the system of exploitation and class rule which is upheld and strengthened by militarism and patriotism. We, therefore, call upon the workers of all countries to refuse support to their governments in their wars. The wars of the contending national groups of capitalists are not the concern of the workers. The only struggle which would justify the workers in taking up arms is the great struggle of the working class of the world to free itself from economic exploitation and political oppression, and we particularly warn the workers against the snare and delusion of so-called defensive warfare. As against the doctrine of national patriotism we uphold the ideal of international working class solidarity. In support of capitalism, we will not willingly give a single life; in support of the struggle of the workers for freedom we pledge our all.

The working class of the United Kingdom has no quarrel with the working class of any other country. 

There is no such thing as an ideal foreign policy. In international politics, there is no policy which will suit all times and all circumstances. There is none which can be carried out to give a guarantee of enduring peace. This is true, though most people do not believe it. After every outbreak of war historians and others look back to this or that turning point, and say that if only a certain Government had acted differently, with more foresight, the war would not have happened. This kind of reasoning rests on assumptions that are not justified. It assumes that a Government is a free agent, able to follow any policy that the international situation may seem to call for. It ignores the forces behind the Government which determine the Government’s attitude and limit its freedom of action; the electorates that have to be considered, not to mention commercial, industrial and financial groups whose demands on foreign policy are coloured by their trading and other interests. The view taken by the “wise-after-the-event” historians assumes, too, that if one Government gave a certain lead in international affairs other Governments would react in a simple practicable way, determined either by fear of opposing a strong group of Great Powers or by mutual desire to maintain world peace. The historians and many other people are obsessed with the idea that international rivalries and alliances are clashes of the personalities of “great men.” They forget that it is not abroad, at international conferences, but at home in their own immediate social environment, that statesmen learn their principles, motives and methods and form their opinions on what is desirable and what is practicable. Pacts and alliances, the United Nations and World Courts, and so on, may control minor disputes and delay the major ones, but they have not succeeded in the past twenty years and will not succeed in the future in preventing war. World peace, like the abolition of property, is something only to be achieved through socialism.

We again take the opportunity provided by one of capitalism’s bloody wars, to reaffirm the fact that no war is worth the shedding of a single drop of working class blood.

We repeat again: there are no issues or interests involved in any war that are the least concern of the working class. This vile madhouse called capitalism has created an endless succession of wars. Since this Party was formed in 1904 we have condemned them all. It is high time the workers of all lands finished killing and dying for capitalism, and proclaimed their own class interest by establishing socialism. We represent the conception of socialism of the future. We believe that these purposes for which we stand should end impoverishment and win the earth from the fear of war. We seek a world in which the exploitation of man by man shall cease, when the evolution of human society to new and higher forms shall become possible to all mankind, and when socialism and peace shall be enjoyed by all.

Suppose we were in control of our own destiny? Suppose we workers owned the world there would be no war in which we killed each other off like flies.

 American farmers in the late 19th and early 20th century knew exactly how the railroads and banks were screwing them. Likewise, organized labor understood from the Homestead Strike to the Battle of Blair Mountain that they fought and died in shocking numbers for the simple dignity to be free men and women rather than exist as wage slaves. 

 In 2016, the farm vote went 70-80 percent to Trump, a candidate who told them clearly that he would ignite a tariff war with the farmers’ largest overseas customer for soybeans and pork. For good measure, he would cut off the source of labor they needed for harvesting and downstream processing. Farm income plummeted and rural suicides spiked. No matter; they voted again for Tump in 2020 in even higher numbers.

In 2019 a vote on whether to unionize was held at the Chattanooga Volkswagen plant. VW, which actually has union members on its board back in Germany, said it was neutral on unionization, so there were no heavy-handed Amazon-style tactics used against the plant’s hourly employees. The workers voted to reject it.

Why is it that people are insidiously bamboozled to act against their own interests on behalf of the wealthy and powerful? Why would poverty-stricken disabled retirees vote for Republicans and against Medicare For All programs?

Elon Musk has a higher net worth than the gross domestic product of a country like Ukraine, with over 40 million people. In the past, Americans knew about corruption and called the oligarchs “Robber Barons”. 

For nearly two centuries, the works of Marx and others have dissected and denounced the machinations of the rich.

 In 2017, Americans spent $71 billion on lottery tickets nationwide, an average of over $1,000 per year per consumer. With the odds of winning the Mega Millions at one in 302 million, there is a good reason why mathematicians do not play the lottery. 

Why are so many of our fellow workers voting irrationally against their own interests? 

Adapted from here

Opinion | Why Do Tens of Millions in US Support an Economic System That Doesn’t Benefit Them? | Mike Lofgren (commondreams.org)