Kitchener’s Finger

Lord Kitchener is flexing his finger,

A beckoning to come hither once more,

Inducing young men and women to war.

In the cenotaph memory lingers,

Although it appears amnesia prevails

When a call to the colours comes their way

And they sleep-march towards their beds of clay;

Too often, it seems, humanity fails.

Enough now of the lame old excuses

For yet another bellicose mission,

When it’s rivalry and competition,

And the prospects of profit seduces.

A radical change is required because

The price of peace is capitalism’s loss.

D. A.

Alan William John West is an ex Parliamentary Under-Secretary of State at the Home Office who worked for ex Labour Prime Minister Gordon Brown.

West is also an ex First Sea Lord and Chief of Naval Staff. Gordon Brown made West a Peer. West is establishment through and through. He might warrant the description of a British apparatchik.

Under the by line of ‘Lord West’ he has written a piece for a red-top newspaper, The Sun. It’s titled, ‘If war is imminent we need to spend money NOW before it’s too late – the five things we desperately need to do.’ It begs the interesting question, why publish a piece like this in the Soaraway Sun?

Among all the Boys Own appeal to patriotism [see Samuel Johnson on that subject] , and vacuous remarks like, ‘Nothing makes you prouder than serving your country, [has West never read some of the First World War poets?] and ‘Never underestimate the courage of this nation’ [And never understimate the ability of Capitalism to persuade enough of the working class to go off and fight for the interests of the ruling class.] Dulce et decorum est pro patria mori, it isn’t and it never will be.

Arms manufacturers and their acolytes are already turning record profits from the conflicts presently going on in the world. Is this the equivalent of Yosser Hughes ‘gizza job’ but now it’s giz us more money so we can make more profits from all the death and destruction we an inflict? War is good for business!

West says, after bemoaning the state of military forces says, ‘If war is imminent we need to spend the money now. Our European partners are finally waking up to the need to dramatically increase their defence spending, with Poland and Germany taking action. We need Russian president Vladimir Putin to get the message that he can’t invade any more countries like he has Ukraine. By spending money beefing up our defence now, we can prevent a far more costly world war later. No dictator wants to invade a country capable of defeating them on the battlefield.

The most important contribution being made by Britain at the moment is helping to keep world trade flowing. [Bingo! That’s the important thing.}

Houthi rebels are firing deadly missiles at unarmed merchant sailors and it is our brave servicemen and women in the Red Sea standing up to them. HMS Richmond, HMS Diamond, HMS Lancaster and a squadron of three mine-hunting vessels and support ship RFA Cardigan Bay are part of Operation Prosperity Guardian that aims to protect container ships passing through this key trade route. No one should be in any doubt that the Houthis are well-armed with Iranian drones, ballistic missiles and cruise missiles which put innocent merchant seamen and our sailors in peril.

The morale of those on board our naval force in the Red Sea is high. They are incredibly well trained and highly motivated, adding to global security. The same can be said for the pilots flying the Typhoon jets from Cyprus which have carried out raids to deplete Houthi capabilities.

A quirk of MOD rules means that as a former head of my service I am automatically on the “active list”. It is not likely that the Royal Navy would ever need to call on my services in times of war, but if they did, I would immediately take up my post, even at the age of 75. {Think you’d be in a very tiny minority there Admiral.]

In World War Two Sir Walter Cowan famously shot at Nazi tanks in North Africa with his pistol at the age of 73. What is letting this country down is not our servicemen and women, it is the politicians leading them. We desperately need more ships, to replenish our supplies, increase military manpower, [i.e. persuade more members of the working class to go and fight capitalism’s wars for it.] ensure up-to-date maintenance and modernise our equipment. If that is done, we may avoid war. Should the unthinkable occur, then if we don’t give our military the tools they need, we can’t expect them to get the job done.’

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/25740607/lord-west-spend-money-army-war-imminent/

THE SOCIALIST PARTY AGAINST ALL CAPITALIST WARS.

‘You load sixteen tons and what do you yet?

Another day older and deeper in debt

Saint Peter don’t you call me cause I can’t go

I owe my soul to the Company store’

Religious imagery apart, this song could be taken as a metaphor for the relationship between the working class and the ruling capitalist class. The surplus value produced by the labour power of the working class is turned into profits by the exploiters.

There are several options by which the capitalist class can take advantage of the source of their wealth and the latest one involves working producers until they drop. Where might this end if capitalism is allowed to continue? Working until you’re 75, 80, 85?

You’re never to old, or to young, to become a Socialist. Given the option of ensuring the transition to a social sytem where quality goods and services are produced for use, not profit, or slaving away all your life to increase the wealth of a minority who look upon you as nothing more than a cash cow, which do you choose?

‘The retirement age will have to rise to 71 for middle-aged workers across the UK, according to research into the impact of growing life expectancy and falling birth-rates on the state pension.

The UK pension age of 66 is set to rise to 67 between May 2026 and March 2028. From 2044, it is expected to rise to 68.

But the research suggests that this is not enough, and that anyone born after April 1970 may have to work until they are 71 before claiming their pension.

This age limit may need to be set even higher, say experts, thanks to the high rate of workers exiting the workforce before they reach state pension age, predominantly due to preventable ill health.

Les Mayhew, associate head of global research at the International Longevity Centre and author of the report State Pension Age and Demographic Change, said: “In the UK, state pension age would need to be 70 or 71 compared with 66 now, to maintain the status quo of the number of workers per state pensioner.

“But if you bring preventable ill health into the equation, that would have to increase even more,” added Mayhew, who is also professor of statistics at Bayes Business School and has advised the government on rises to the state pension age multiple times as a senior civil servant and in his current roles.

By age 70, only 50% of adults in England and Wales are now disability-free and able to work. A smaller working population and a large economically inactive population reduces the tax base to pay for pensions – and creates huge labour shortages, which creates its own problems.

According to the Office for Budget Responsibility, pensioner benefits will cost the UK government £136bn in 2023-24, of which £124bn will be spent on state pensions.

Jonathan Cribb, associate director and head of retirement at the Institute for Fiscal Studies, said that while he did not disagree with a higher pension age, increasing it without addressing other cost-saving measures was not “realistic or equitable”. He added: “It would disproportionately impact poorer individuals whose ill-health means they have shorter lives, and so who receive pensions for less time.”

While the ILC’s solution is “illustrative of the kind of pressure that an ageing population puts on the public finance”, a rise in the retirement age to 71 was not a “realistic policy option unless you have a real emergency”, he added.

Cribb pointed out that while state pensions and pension benefits are estimated to increase by £45bn by 2050, the pressure on public finance from health and social care is estimated to increase by £105bn in today’s terms over the same period. “The real issue is actually around the NHS and social care,” he said.

The Intergenerational Foundation, an independent think tank, agreed that the pension age had to rise, but questioned on whose shoulders that cost should fall.

Younger people, their research has found, do not have the financial assets that their parents and grandparents did. In 2010, those under 40 held £7.53 of every £100 of wealth. By 2020, that had fallen to £3.98. One-third of the UK’s 14 million Gen-Xers are at high risk of retiring on insufficient income.

Angus Hanton, co-founder of the think tank, said pension age should be based on life expectancy and occupation. He also supports a wealth tax to fund and pay more towards people’s retirement, and reducing income tax and national insurance.

“The over-60s should finance their own extra retirement years since they have received such generous treatment from the state,” he said. “The money raised can be used to invest in improving the health and prospects of younger generations so they are less of an economic burden as they age.”

“Increasing the state pension age would be a terrible policy – a really bad way of attempting to make people more productive,” he said.

The government said it would ensure that the state pension remained “a sustainable and fair foundation of income for future generations”.

A spokesperson said: “We have committed £70m in employment and skills support for the over-50s, which has seen an extra 54,000 over-50s added to company payrolls. Our £2.5bn Back to Work plan is supporting people to stay fit and find work, in addition to £14.1bn to improve health services to help people live longer, healthier lives.”’

https://www.theguardian.com/money/2024/feb/05/uk-state-pension-age-will-soon-need-to-rise-to-71-say-experts

‘When the UK raised the age of retirement and heightened the national insurance contribution criteria to be eligible for a state pension, there were complaints from women who were particularly affected by the changes but very little wider protest.

It has not been as easy for the French government plan to raise the retirement age from 62 to 64. Trade unions have held nationwide strikes that have brought France to standstills, hoping that strikes and accompanying demonstrations will bring about a similar outcome as in 1995 when then-president Jacques Chirac abandoned his pension change proposals. Millions of workers have been involved to disrupt industry and transport across France. However, unlike the previous five strikes, trade unions declared the 7th March strike, ‘grèves reconductibles’, meaning workers will vote at the end of each strike day on whether to continue industrial action. With no fixed end date, unions hope to damage the economy so severely that it defeats the government.

Although the country’s current retirement age is one of the lowest in the European Union, the existing rules already require most people to work past the age of 64 in order to qualify for the full pension. By raising the retirement age by two years most workers would need to work 43 years, rather than 42, to be eligible for a full pension.

The government claims postponing the retirement age by two years and extending the pay-in period would yield an additional €17.7 billion in annual pension contributions, allowing the budget to break even by 2027 and safeguarding what they say would be a failing system. But not all economists agree.

In September 2022, a report by the French Pensions Advisory Council found the pensions system actually produced surpluses in 2021 (€900 million) and 2022 (€3.2 billion), although it did predict the system would run a deficit on average over the next quarter of a century. According to its calculations, ‘between 2023 and 2027, the pension system’s finances will deteriorate’, reaching a deficit of between 0.3 and 0.4 percent of GDP, or just over €10 billion a year, until 2032. But the Council predicted an eventual balance beginning in the mid-2030s.

A deficit of €10-12 billion per year is not necessarily excessive for a pension system whose total annual expenditure amounts to around €340 billion. ‘The results of this report do not support the claim that pensions spending is out of control,’ the Council wrote. Pension spending as a proportion of GDP is expected to remain stable, at around 14 percent of GDP, before rising to up to 14.7 percent by 2032.

Pensions expert Michaël Zemmour said, ‘It has become a form of political discourse to exaggerate and dramatise the deficit issue, to claim the system urgently needs to be reformed, when in fact the deficit is rather moderate’.

He explained, ‘It’s not about saving the pension system, it’s about financing tax cuts for businesses,’ highlighting France’s intention to finance tax cuts with structural reforms to bring the national deficit under 3 percent by 2027, a requirement of EU member states (bit.ly/3kUXHlx).

Government attempts to appeal to younger generations on the grounds that it is they who carry the burden of supporting the elderly have not been successful. Despite retirement being a distant prospect, France’s younger workers have been active in the protests.

One student said, ‘We live in a productivity-obsessed society that is preoccupied with economic growth and which has been destroying our planet for decades. Now we’re being asked to work for two more years so we can produce even more.’ Another explained, ‘We should be able to live longer and in better health without working ourselves to death. Besides, if they’re talking about retiring at 64 now, what will it be when I’m 60? Will I have to work until I’m 70 or 75? ’ (bit.ly/3JofydM).

In the United States, where the retirement age for Social Security is already transitioning to 67, a Republican Party committee has called for the retirement age to increase by three years so that people born on or after 1978 will have to wait until the age of 70 for a full pension (bit.ly/3mFHwcg).

In Germany, the Federation of German Employers’ Associations in the Metal and Electrical Engineering Industries has also suggested raising its retirement age to 70. However, Johannes Geyer of the German Institute for Economic Research believes ‘Raising the retirement age puts a lot of pressure on the working population. People with low life expectancy, and those with health problems, will suffer more; a relevant part of the population dies before reaching retirement age.’ He seeks an alternative solution. ‘We need migration. It’s essential that we have enough people coming from abroad to work in Germany’ (bit.ly/3mCFM3r).

Working people must reject this capitalist imposition – ‘live longer, work longer’. We should have a society where we can appreciate the added years of our lives and not be made to work until we drop.

ALJO

From the Socialist Standard, April 2023 https://socialiststandardmyspace.blogspot.com/2023/04/material-world-live-to-work-or-work-to.html

One’s heart bleeds for Elon Musk. No it doesn’t, just joking. Capitalism’s no joke though for the vast majority.

‘A judge in the US state of Delaware has voided Elon Musk’s $56 billion Tesla pay package, arguing that the company’s board of directors had failed to prove that the billionaire CEO deserved such a high compensation. Musk responded by publicly floating a move to Texas.

The 2018 pay deal was the highest in US corporate history, and made Musk the richest man in the world, with an estimated fortune of up to $220 billion as of last year. Under its terms, Musk was given stock options that would pay out if Tesla hit certain performance targets.

However, Tesla investor Richard Tornetta, who owned just nine shares in the electric automaker at the time, sued Musk and the company, arguing that the billionaire had misled shareholders by telling them that these targets would be more difficult to reach than they were.

The case was finally brought to trial in November, and Chancery Court Chancellor Kathaleen McCormick ruled in Tornetta’s favour on Tuesday. In her 200-page judgment, McCormick argued that Musk had “enormous influence over Tesla” and was therefore able to convince shareholders that such a pay deal was necessary. Even though Musk had excused himself from board meetings on the pay deal, McCormick claimed that five of the six directors who voted on it were “beholden to Musk or had compromising conflicts.”

“Swept up by the rhetoric of ‘all upside’, or perhaps starry eyed by Musk’s superstar appeal, the board never asked the $55.8 billion question: Was the plan even necessary for Tesla to retain Musk and achieve its goals?” McCormick wrote.

The judge instructed Musk and Tornetta to confer and decide how Musk would go about handing back any of the pay package he has already received.

Not all US states allow corporate courts to override shareholder decisions. “Never incorporate your company in the state of Delaware,” Musk posted on X, which he owns, after the decision was announced. “I recommend incorporating in Nevada or Texas if you prefer shareholders to decide matters,” he added.’

Capitalism at its finest.

‘The world’s richest people may be sad to hear that 2023 is coming to a close, given how lucrative the year was for them.

In total, the 500 wealthiest people saw their net worth jump an eye-popping $1.5 trillion, Bloomberg reported. That’s a massive turnaround from 2022, when that same group lost almost $2 trillion. The growth was largely due to the stellar performance of tech stocks, which helped billionaires in that field gain a whopping $658 billion, or a 48 percent surge in their wealth.

Unsurprisingly, Elon Musk led the pack, with an additional $95.4 billion boosting his net worth to $232 billion and easily making him the wealthiest person in the world. In comparison, the Tesla and SpaceX founder saw a $138 billion dip in 2022. After his impressive 2023, though, the mercurial Musk regained his position on top from LVMH CEO Bernard Arnault, who is now virtually tied with Jeff Bezos for the title of the second-wealthiest person on the planet. (Arnault has a $179 billion fortune, while Bezos clocks in at $178 billion, after gaining $71.3 billion this year.)

Other notable names from 2023 include Mark Zuckerberg, who added $84 billion to his bank account throughout the year. The Meta founder is now worth $130 billion in total. And while she may not be a household name, the L’Oréal heir Françoise Bettencourt Meyers is now the wealthiest woman on the planet and the first woman to amass a $100 billion fortune.’

https://finance.yahoo.com/news/world-500-wealthiest-people-got-180000426.html

Bitter Winter mainly focuses on religious issues particularly religious repression within China. However, this piece is worthy of attention as it demonstrates the nationalistic determination to selfishly deny sharing of life essentials, water resources, to others which is typical of State behaviour under a capitalist system.

‘It is often said that conflict over water is probably going to be the cause of the next global war. Three-fourths of the earth is made up of water, but only two-and-a-half percent of them is potable. Asia is already grappling with a critical water shortage, with the least per capita water availability among the continents. An MIT study warns that this crisis by 2050 is likely to drown the region into severe water scarcity. In a climate of escalating political tension, competition for this precious resource could become a major threat to long-term peace and stability across Asia, with consequences for human rights as well. This stark reality demands immediate and focused action to manage and share water resources sustainably before competition gives way to conflict.

This is precisely why nations have begun to preserve fresh water and, in some cases, have gone beyond becoming global water hegemons, as they grow and develop. The People’s Republic of China (PRC) provides the best example of this trend today. The PRC, a water-stressed country, has made huge investments in water-based resources globally. Apart from the geo-political implications, the PRC’s water hegemony has hurt the environment and well-being of local populations and pushed nations into debt traps due to resource-intensive investments in dams or hydroelectric projects.

China’s aggressive dam construction, with over 308 dams built in 70 countries, has sparked worldwide concern. These dams, generating 81 GW of power, have disrupted river ecosystems, caused environmental damage, and displaced millions downstream. Despite concerns, China continues building mega-projects like the Three Gorges Dam in Hubei, displacing 1.5 million residents.

Central Asia is grappling with a worsening water situation due to increased water usage by China from rivers like the Illy. This poses a threat to shrink Kazakhstan’s vital Lake Balkhash, echoing the tragic near-disappearance of the Aral Sea in neighbouring Uzbekistan. Additionally, China’s water diversions on the Irtysh River, a crucial source of drinking water for Astana and a tributary to Russia’s Ob River, raise further concerns. Beyond water quantity, China’s expansive activities in Xinjiang—encompassing energy, manufacturing, and agriculture—pose an even greater threat. Just as Chinese industry has polluted its own major rivers, practices in Xinijang threaten to contaminate the transboundary waters crucial for Central Asia, adding hazardous chemicals and fertilizers, exacerbating the region’s water insecurity.

China’s unique geography grants it immense control over water resources. Six major Asian rivers originate there, flowing into eighteen downstream countries, effectively making China the “upstream water hegemon.”

This power raises concerns about water weaponization. China’s domestic water demands have led to extensive damming, impacting downstream nations. For example, dams on the Mekong River have disrupted aquatic life, sediment flow, and riverbanks, causing droughts and floods in Thailand and Laos.

A 2019 study by the US based Stimson Centre revealed that despite heavy rainfall in the upper Mekong region, China held back water in its dams, causing severe droughts downstream. Satellite images confirmed this, showing dams as the prime culprit. The lack of cooperation between countries on dam management has worsened the situation. China’s eleven dams disrupt wildlife, block sediment flow, and contribute to collapsing riverbanks and displacing communities. Despite sharing many transboundary water sources, China avoids agreements with its neighbors and international efforts, prioritizing its own “water sovereignty.” Their rapid dam construction reinforces this approach, as evidenced by their reluctance to share water data with Mekong countries or India, where they claim strong water rights. China’s unilateral and maximalist approach to water management puts downstream countries at risk and hinders regional cooperation. Population displacement and limited access to resources obviously cause human rights problems, in addition to the ecological problems created by these policies.

While China holds a significant portion of the world’s freshwater within the Tibetan Autonomous Region(TAR), its exploitation for hydropower remains limited. Despite China’s total hydropower capacity reaching 341 million kilowatts by 2017, the TAR only contributed 1.77 million kilowatts, barely 1% of its potential. This underutilization raises concerns about downstream impacts on neighbouring regions. However, China’s ambitious 14th Five-Year Plan includes the Medog Dam near the border with India, driven partly by its commitment to carbon neutrality by 2060. As China moves away from coal-based energy (currently contributing almost 70% of its energy consumption) towards cleaner options like hydroelectricity, further dam construction in the TAR can be expected, potentially intensifying downstream consequences.

Tension is brewing in the Himalayas over China’s ambitious dam projects on rivers flowing into India and Bangladesh. This unilateral action raises concerns beyond simply altering the rivers’ flow. In 2020, China was caught using bulldozers to block the river Galwan, a tributary of the Indus, diverting its water away from India. This incident exposes China’s potential control over water resources, earning it the label of a “water hegemon.”

The proposed Medog Dam, located near the Indian border, adds to the growing concern. This massive dam could significantly impact downstream countries like India and Bangladesh, potentially straining India’s water resources for agriculture. Conversely, mismanagement of the dam could lead to devastating floods in India, like the 2000 Tibetan dam burst that caused widespread flooding. Recent alterations in the Yarlung Tsangpo River’s flow due to landslides further highlight the unpredictable nature of the situation and the potential threat of “water bombs” unleashed by sudden changes.

Raising concerns for downstream neighbours, China has taken decisive action regarding the Brahmaputra River, a crucial water source for both Bangladesh and northern India. To fuel a large hydroelectric project in Tibet, China recently diverted the flow of one of the Brahmaputra’s tributaries, essentially cutting it off. This disruption adds to ongoing worries, as China is also actively pursuing the construction of a dam on another Brahmaputra tributary, potentially leading to a chain of artificial lakes within the river system. Both projects have the potential to significantly impact water availability and flow patterns downstream, prompting anxieties about future access and usage of this vital resource.

China’s extensive investment in hydropower abroad, totalling $114 billion in the past two decades, raises concerns about its motives. Critics argue that these investments, concentrated in resource-rich regions like Southeast Asia, are driven by a “neo-colonial” ambition to secure resources and materials for China’s own economic growth, often at the expense of other countries. This concern is further fueled by China’s dominance in the global hydropower market, with an estimated 70% share. The environmental toll of China’s water hegemony extends beyond the immediate geopolitical concerns, affecting ecosystems, biodiversity, and the well-being and human rights of local populations in the interconnected web of transboundary waters.

Strategic affairs expert Brahma Chellany observed how China’s territorial claims in the Himalayas and the South China Sea are paralleled by “stealthier efforts” to control water resources in shared river basins. Given this trend, countries in South and Southeast Asia face a potential threat from China’s combined strategy of territorial expansion and water resource dominance.’

Bitter Wiinter 31 January

https://bitterwinter.org/chinas-water-hegemony-policy-a-threat-to-neighboring-countries-and-human-rights/

This evening’s meeting  on Zoom:

https://www.worldsocialism.org/spgb/socialist-standard/2020s/2024/no-1434-february-2024/