Our Task in the Socialist Party

For our part, we must expose the old world to the full light of day and shape the new one in a positive way. The longer the time that events allow to thinking humanity for taking stock of its position, and to suffering mankind for mobilising its forces, the more perfect on entering the world will be the product that the present time bears in its womb. – Marx



Gloom and despair have gripped millions around the world. We live under dark clouds, is there anyone in the socialist movement to whom this thought has not occurred? Many of our fellow-workers see no way out and nowhere to go.



Although we in the Socialist Party have full confidence in the certainty of the great change coming about, it would be foolish for any one of us to attempt to speculate as to the date of the realisation of our goal. Over-expectation is apt to give birth to despair if it meets with disappointment. It nevertheless remains our task to continue our urging of our fellow-workers to press their due claim to that fullness and completeness of life. The demands of non-socialists go little beyond the demand for a bigger ration and better lodging for the slave.



Economically the world was ready for socialism decades ago. But politically the people are not yet ready for socialism. They do not yet understand why capitalism is not capable of feeding, clothing, or sheltering them. They are capable of seeing only their immediate ills, and hence are capable of making only immediate and emergency demands. The burning problem of the day, therefore, for the Socialist Party is to construct the bridge between working people and the socialist revolution. People can see the abundance surrounding them. They can see the fertile fields full of crops. They can see the packed shops and warehouses, the potential of new technology. And they can see just as clearly the empty plates on the dinner tables of many. They can hear children crying for food. They know of the slums and shanty-towns. They can feel all the horrible misery of the rotten conditions, the shame and degradation in which many are compelled to live under. The first and most important point is that it is useless to depend on the government for protection.  One of the most important lessons a socialist learns is that the state is the executive committee of the ruling class. Another is that the emancipation of the working class must be the work of the working class itself.



The world today is a place of stark and bewildering contradictions. With the greatest industrial and agricultural power history has ever before seen, we cannot feed, clothe and provide a decent livelihood for billions. As people sweat and toil away to survive, billionaires squander fortunes and fly around the world in private jets. Poverty and economic insecurity exist alongside extravagance. The ruling class is capable of extinguishing life on the planet with nuclear war and is on the verge of environmental self-destruction with climate change. Our society is based upon violence, despair and degradation, and people’s life’s aim has become one of narrow self-gratification. The capitalist system of exploitation, violence, racism and war strangles our lives. Real life, in contrast, cries out for work for the welfare of humanity. What is the reason for these contradictions between the promises, the potential of this society, and its reality? Why is there such an agonising gap between what is and what could be! 



The rich have one basic goal in life: to make more and more profits, and they accomplish this by controlling the economics, politics, and cultural life. The capitalists will throw workers out into the streets to starve, promote racism, and build a military arsenal that can destroy the world several times over – anything for profits! This is an irrational and unjust system. But life does not have to be this way.



We can improve our lives and society, and we can eliminate exploitation and capitalist injustice, by overturning the capitalist system. We can replace capitalism with a rational and humane system – socialism. Socialism is a social system where social wealth is genuinely controlled by society and for the benefit of society; where the common good, not profits. Such an economic and political transformation will be radical, but a radical solution is what it will take to bury the miseries of capitalism. The socialist revolution has become a historical necessity and possibility. There is no other choice today but for the working people to organise to struggle and, one day, win socialism. Socialism will qualitatively improve the lives of the working people. Women and men, young and old, and people of all lands are realising we must unite and struggle to survive, to be able to work, eat and live as decent human beings. If the working people, and not the corporations, controlled the great resources of our society, we could improve all our lives. We could guarantee a decent standard of living for all. We could end pollution and global warming.



These are the promises that encourage us forward. These are the hopes and dreams of socialism. The Socialist Party is dedicated to realising that day when the exploiters, racists and warmongers will be thrown from power forever, and a new life for the people of the world can begin.







World Cancer Day

The World Health Organization (WHO) warned that cancer cases would rise by 81 percent in low- and middle-income countries by 2040 because of a lack of investment in prevention and care. The WHO pointed out that one in five people worldwide would face a cancer diagnosis in their lifetime.



“If people have access to primary care and referral systems then cancer can be detected early, treated effectively and cured. Cancer should not be a death sentence for anyone, anywhere,”  Ren Minghui, a WHO assistant director general said.



More than 90 percent of high-income countries reported that treatment services for cancer were available in their public health system in 2019 compared with less than 15 percent of low-income countries, the report said.

“At least seven million lives could be saved over the next decade by identifying the most appropriate science for each country situation, by basing strong cancer responses on universal health coverage, and by mobilising different stakeholders to work together,” Tedros Adhanom Ghebreyesus, director general of the WHO, was quoted as saying.



https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2020/02/treatment-afghans-struggle-cope-cancer-200204081013954.html

Work is unhealthy

More than a third of workers in Britain are struggling in low-quality jobs that risk damaging their health, according to research.

In a report exposing the scale of precarious, low-paid or unfulfilling employment across the country, the Health Foundation said that as many as 36% of workers in Britain – about 10 million people – were in such a position.
While more people are in work than at any time in history, the charity warned that a proliferation of low-quality employment carries health risks. As many as 15% of workers in low-quality jobs say they have poor quality health, compared with 7% in good working environments, according to the research.

In a signal of entrenched inequality across the country and the challenge for some workers to find more fulfilling or better-paid jobs, the study found that as many as 51% of people in low-quality work in 2010-11 were stuck in the same position six years later.

The report warned that substandard employment extended far beyond zero-hours contracts and the gig economy. The Health Foundation defined low-quality work as a job that has two or more negative aspects, such as poor wellbeing, security, satisfaction, individual autonomy or pay.

Adam Tinson, a senior analyst at the Health Foundation, said: “Low-quality work is where someone feels stressed and unfulfilled, whether that’s due to pay, insecurity, a lack of autonomy or a feeling of dissatisfaction. This can harm people’s health.”



According to a separate study published on Tuesday by the Resolution Foundation, sustained employment is no safeguard against in-work poverty for people across the country.

The foundation said that poverty rates fall from 35% to 18% when people move into work, but that there had been a sharp rise in the number of working households in Britain struggling to make ends meet.

Among adults in poverty in Britain, almost seven in 10 live in households where at least one person works. This figure has risen from five in 10 two decades ago.

Lindsay Judge, principal analyst at Resolution, said: “Work alone cannot eliminate poverty. Support to sustain employment and progress out of low pay are needed alongside a benefit system that provides adequate support for low-income working families.”

Forward to Socialist Revolution

The Socialist Party proposes that all resources, all land and buildings, all factories, mines, all the means of transportation and communication, should be, not private property, but the common property of all. We propose that production be made to serve the needs of society, rather than to serve the needs of a few parasites. Planned production for use on the basis of common ownership without any class division is called socialism. Experience has proved that planning under capitalism is impossible. When socialists talk of a society organised on the basis of planned production and distribution we have in mind is very simple. Do away with production for profit.



With our amassed knowledge and information, we can assess all the resources, plant and manpower that is available, calculate how many products each sector of industry can produce, determine the consumption of the population to ensure that nobody will go hungry or without a home. Is this impossible?



We can make use of the best brains of scientists to improve our technology and our methods of work, encourage research for the purpose of improving life, not just merely in industry and agriculture but for all areas of life. Manufacturing output can increase to permit the distribution of the fruits of increased production among all the members of society for the improvement of their wellbeing, always heightening the technology of production to enrich the economic and cultural life of all the members of society and to ease their toil. Continue this process indefinitely. When you do so there will be no crises, no unemployment, no exploitation, no wars, no fear of the future. Is this impossible?



That would be only a beginning, for human inventiveness knows no limit and the progress is unending. The application of science to human society shows what immense possibilities for the satisfaction of human wants are contained in the achievements of science and in its future growth. Socialism reduces human labour to the easy task of supervising machinery a few hours a day. It leaves mankind free to engage in higher intellectual pursuits. It makes everybody responsible for the welfare of all. Let everybody work according to  ability; let everybody receive from the common stock of goods according to  needs. There is no exploitation, no oppression, no insecurity, no poverty. Life is made humane. Is this impossible?



Capitalism is based on the principle of private property of certain humans “owning” the earth for the purpose of exploiting it for profit. At an earlier stage, exploiters even believed they could own other humans. Profit consists of taking out more than you put in. According to Marxist theory, profit is extracted from workers’ labour when the capitalists pay them less than the value of what they produce. The portion of the value of the product that the capitalist keeps is called surplus value. The amount of surplus value that the capitalist can keep varies with the level of organisation of the workers, and with their level of privilege within the world labour pool. But the working class can never be paid the full value of their labour under capitalism, because the capitalist class exists by extracting surplus value from their labour.



The working class must fight against all attacks on the working class including the attacks on the welfare state which previous generations struggled hard to win. In addition, the necessity of moving beyond this system and to socialism must not be forgotten. Reforms won by workers under this system can always be taken away and that a revolutionary overthrow by the working class is the only solution to crisis and oppression. This system cannot be stopped by force. It is violent and ruthless beyond the capacity of any people’s resistance movement.


Profit before health

The US has some of the best doctors and facilities in the world – but accessing them for many is a constant battle. Millions of Americans are uninsured, and high deductibles mean even those that have it often struggle to pay for treatment and medications.
 “Surveys show that many Americans with insurance are forgoing needed care because of cost,” Bob Doherty from the American College of Physicians (ACP) says. “Surveys also show that concern about not being able to afford care ranks among the top concerns of the public.”



Among the poorest 20 per cent of Americans, one-third of their income is spent on healthcare, according to a new study. 
Out of pocket payments have grown over recent years, and nearly half of millennials have put off needed medical care because they can’t afford it. 



Guyana and Oil

Exxon’s exploitative oil deal with Guyana will cause the country to lose up to US$55 billion, according to a new Global Witness investigation based on an OpenOil analysis.




The new report, Signed Away, shows how the oil major used aggressive tactics and threats to pressure inexperienced Guyanese officials to sign the deal for the Stabroek license—one of the world’s largest oil finds in years.




“It is shocking that Exxon would seek such an exploitative deal in one of the Western Hemisphere’s poorest countries,” said Jonathan Gant, Senior Campaigner at Global Witness.




“Guyana’s urgent development needs—such as building new hospitals and schools, and protecting itself from rising sea levels that put 90% of the population at risk—will not be met by Exxon walking away with an extra US$55 billion in its back pocket.”



Exxon’s original license for the Stabroek oil block—off Guyana’s Caribbean coast—dates back to 1999. However, in April 2016, after Exxon found oil in the block, the company set out to pressure Guyanese officials to sign a rushed, new contract to renew its oil license – knowing that its existing license was running out.



Evidence seen by Global Witness shows how Exxon paid for a lavish trip for Natural Resources Minister Raphael Trotman to visit its Texas headquarters during the Stabroek negotiations. The trip included a first-class flight, limousine transportation, and an extravagant dinner at an exclusive restaurant.




This may violate Exxon’s internal policy, stating that staff should consider whether gifts to officials may “improperly influence pending business decisions.” Exxon denies any wrongdoing, saying it is “committed to the highest standards of business conduct, and we follow all local laws and regulations,” while Trotman has said he saw nothing wrong with travelling to Texas on Exxon’s dime.



The investigation also reveals how Trotman knew Exxon would soon announce its oil find results, but rushed to sign the deal anyway, despite the advice of experts.




Trotman may have also suffered from a possible conflict of interest as he has been close political allies with one of Exxon’s Guyanese lawyers. The lawyer – Nigel Hughes – has denied he represented Exxon on the deal, but admitted that his firm has represented Exxon since 2009 and that he has worked for the company on other matters.




Global Witness does not have evidence that Trotman’s Stabroek negotiations were influenced – unwittingly or otherwise – by his expensive Texas trip or his ties to Hughes. But the relationship between Trotman, Hughes, and Exxon should be investigated.



Global Witness calls on Guyanese officials to investigate the Exxon deal and the ministers involved, and to demand a new, fair license. Global Witness also calls on US authorities, including the State Department, to support renegotiation.




A fiscal study conducted by the expert analysts at OpenOil – commissioned by Global Witness and released alongside this investigation – estimates Guyana is set to lose an average of US$1.3 billion per year. Recovering this money through renegotiating a fair deal could boost the country’s annual US$1.4 billion budget.




In letters to Global Witness and OpenOil, Exxon disputed OpenOil’s findings, saying that they did not account for Guyana’s “frontier” status as an oil producer. However, the company did not comment on the detail of OpenOil’s fiscal analysis. Trotman also told Global Witness that getting maximum revenues from Exxon was not the government’s main aim and the country needed Exxon to help protect its borders from Venezuela.  Guyana’s Foreign Minister Carl Greenidge argued that any analysis must focus not only on financial data from international oil deals but on Guyana’s strategic considerations and the risk to Exxon of military conflict in the area.




OpenOil studied reports of the financial terms of government oil contracts around the world, including by the International Monetary Fund. These reports show that, based on international data, Guyana is receiving a lower profit share from Exxon than many other international oil deals.




The Stabroek deal is not the only questionable license that Exxon obtained in Guyana. Evidence seen by Global Witness also shows that the two other Guyanese oil licenses – called Kaieteur and Canje – raise red flags for corruption. They were initially awarded to companies with limited experience that flipped shares of their licenses to Exxon before doing any real work.




The official who awarded Kaieteur and Canje – former Natural Resources Minister Robert Persaud – issued the licenses just before leaving office in 2015 and has shown an extraordinary degree of ignorance about the ultimate owners of the winning companies. The companies who initially obtained Kaieteur and Canje have denied wrongdoing, as have Exxon and Persaud.




“Exxon’s Kaieteur and Canje licenses raise corruption red flags and should be investigated,” said Gant. “Given these problems and the threats to Guyana posed by the global climate emergency, Guyana should renegotiate the Stabroek license and then ban all new drilling in the country.”


https://www.commondreams.org/newswire/2020/02/03/exxons-exploitative-oil-deal-guyana-will-deprive-country-us55-billion



Defining Poverty American Style

The USA has the world’s 10th highest per capita income at $62,795 and an unrivalled gross domestic product (GDP) of $21.3 trillion. 



Despite that, in 2020, an estimated 11.9 million American kids — 16.2% of the total — live below the official poverty line, which is a paltry $25,701 for a family of four with two kids.



 Put another way, according to the Children’s Defense Fund, kids now constitute one-third of the 38.1 million Americans classified as poor and 70% of them have at least one working parent.



Yes, the proportion of kids living below the poverty line has zigzagged down from 22% when the country was being ravaged by the Great Recession of 2008-2009 and was even higher in prior decades, but no one should crack open the champagne bottles just yet. 



The relevant standard ought to be how the United States compares to other wealthy countries. The answer: badly. It has the 11th highest child poverty rate of the 42 industrialized countries tracked by the Organization for Economic Cooperation and Development (OECD). Winnow that list down to European Union states and Canada, omitting low and middle-income countries, and our child poverty rate ranks above only Spain’s. 



Use the poverty threshold of the OECD — 50% of a country’s median income ($63,178 for the United States) — and the American child poverty rate leaps to 20%.



Washington allocates only 9% of its federal budget to children, poor or not. That compares to a third for Americans over 65, up from 22% in 1971. If you want a single fact that sums up where we are now, inflation-adjusted per-capita spending on kids living in the poorest families has barely budged compared to 30 years ago whereas the corresponding figure for the elderly has doubled.



Defining poverty may sound straightforward, but it’s not. The government’s annual Official Poverty Measure (OPM), developed in the 1960s, establishes poverty lines by taking into account family size, multiplying the 1963 cost for a minimum food budget by three while factoring in changes in the Consumer Price Index, and comparing the result to family income. In 2018, a family with a single adult and one child was considered poor with an income below $17,308 ($20,2012 for two adults and one child, $25,465 for two adults and two children, and so on). According to the OPM, 11.8% of all Americans were poor that year.



By contrast, the Supplementary Poverty Measure (SPM), published yearly since 2011, builds on the OPM but provides a more nuanced calculus. It counts the post-tax income of families, but also cash flows from the Earned Income Tax Credit (EITC) and the Child Tax Credit (CTC), both of which help low-income households. It adds in government-provided assistance through, say, the Supplemental Nutritional Assistance Program (SNAP), Temporary Aid to Needy Families (TANF), the Children’s Health Insurance Program (CHIP), the National School Lunch Program (NSLP), Medicaid, subsidies for housing and utilities, and unemployment and disability insurance. However, it deducts costs like child care, child-support payments, and out-of-pocket medical expenses. According to the SPM, the 2018 national poverty rate was 12.8%.



Of course, neither of these poverty calculations can tell us how children are actually faring. Put simply, they’re faring worse. In 2018, 16.2% of Americans under 18 lived in families with incomes below the SPM line. And that’s not the worst of it. A 2019 National Academies of Sciences, Engineering, and Medicine study commissioned by Congress found that 9% of poor children belong to families in “deep poverty” (incomes that are less than 50% of the SPM). But 36% of all American children live in poor or “near poor” families, those with incomes within 150% of the poverty line.



Child poverty also varies by race — a lot. The rate for black children is 17.8%; for Hispanic kids, 21.7%; for their white counterparts, 7.9%. Worse, more than half of all black and Hispanic kids live in “near poor” families compared to less than a quarter of white children. Combine age and race and you’ll see another difference, especially for children under five, a population with an overall 2017 poverty rate of 19.2%.  Break those under-fives down by race, however, and here’s what you find: white kids at 15.9%, Hispanic kids at an eye-opening 25.8%, and their black peers at a staggering 32.9%.



The child poverty rate shifts by state and the differences are stark. North Dakota and Utah are at 9%, for instance, while New Mexico and Mississippi are at 27% and 28%. Nineteen states have rates of 20% or more. Check out a color-coded map of geographic variations in child poverty and you’ll see that rates in the South, Southwest, and parts of the Midwest are above the national average, while rural areas tend to have higher proportions of poor families than cities. According to the Department of Agriculture, in rural America, 22% of all children and 26% of those under five were poor in 2017.



Imagine, for a moment, this scenario: a 200-meter footrace in which the starting blocks of some competitors are placed 75 meters behind the others. Barring an Olympic-caliber runner, those who started way in front will naturally win. Now, think of that as an analogy for the predicament that American kids born in poverty face through no fault of their own. They may be smart and diligent, their parents may do their best to care for them, but they begin life with a huge handicap.



As a start, the nutrition of poor children will generally be inferior to that of other kids. No surprise there, but here’s what’s not common knowledge: a childhood nutritional deficit matters for years afterwards, possibly for life. Scientific research shows that, by age three, the quality of childrens’ diets is already shaping the development of critical parts of young brains like the hippocampus and prefrontal cortex in ways that matter. That’s worth keeping in mind because four million American kids under age six were poor in 2018, as were close to half of those in families headed by single women.



Indeed, the process starts even earlier. Poor mothers may themselves have nutritional deficiencies that increase their risk of having babies with low birthweights.  That, in turn, can have long-term effects on children’s health, what level of education they reach, and their future incomes since the quality of nutrition affects brain sizeconcentration, and cognitive capacity. It also increases the chances of having learning disabilities and experiencing mental health problems.



Poor children are likely to be less healthy in other ways as well, for reasons that range from having a greater susceptibility to asthma to higher concentrations of lead in their blood. Moreover, poor families find it harder to get good health care. And add one more thing: in our zip-code-influenced public-school system, such children are likely to attend schools with far fewer resources than those in more affluent neighborhoods.
According to the Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC), between 2008 and 2012, a third of women in their childbearing years filled opioid-based medication prescriptions in pharmacies and an estimated 14%-22% of them were pregnant. The result: an alarming increase in the number of babies exposed to opioids in utero and experiencing withdrawal symptoms at birth, which is also known as neonatal abstinence syndrome, or NAS, in medical lingo. Its effects, a Penn State study found, include future increased sensitivity to pain and susceptibility to fevers and seizures. Between 2000 and 2014, the incidence of NAS increased by a multiple of four. In 2014, 34,000 babies were born with NAS, which, as a CDC report put it, “is equivalent to one baby suffering from opioid withdrawal born approximately every 15 minutes.” (Given the ongoing opioid crisis, it’s unlikely that things have improved in recent years.)



And the complications attributable to NAS don’t stop with birth. Though the research remains at an early stage — the opioid crisis only began in the early 1990s — it suggests that the ill effects of NAS extend well beyond infancy and include impaired cognitive and motor skills, respiratory ailments, learning disabilities, difficulty maintaining intellectual focus, and behavioral traits that make productive interaction with others harder.

The Social Progress Index places the United States 75th out of 149 countries in “access to quality education” and 70th in “access to quality health care” and poor kids are, of course, at a particular disadvantage.



As for cutting child poverty, it hasn’t exactly been a presidential priority in the Trump years — not like the drive to pass a $1.5 trillion corporate and individual income tax cut whose gains flowed mainly to the richest Americans, while inflating the budget deficit to $1 trillion in 2019, according to the Treasury Department. Then there’s that “impenetrable, powerful, beautiful wall.” Its estimated price ranges from $21 billion to $70 billion, excluding maintenance. And don’t forget the proposed extra $33 billion in military spending for this fiscal year alone, part of President Trump’s plan to boost such spending by $683 billion over the next decade.



As for poor kids and their parents, the president and congressional Republicans are beginning to slash an array of programs ranging from the Supplemental Nutritional Assistance Program to Medicaid — $1.2 trillion worth over the next 10 years — that have long helped struggling families and children in particular get by. The Trump administration has, for good measure, rewritten the eligibility rules for such programs in order to lower the number of people who qualify.

The supposed goal: to cut costs by reducing dependence on government. (Never mind the subsidies and tax loopholes Trump’s crew has created for corporations and the super wealthy, which add up to many billions of dollars in spending and lost revenue.) These supposedly work-ethic-driven austerity policies batter working families with young kids that, for example, desperately need childcare, which can take a big bite out of paychecks: 10% or more for all households with kids, but half in the case of poor families.  Add to that the cost of unsubsidized housing. Median monthly rent increased by nearly a third between 2001 and 2015. Put another way, rents consume more than half the income of the bottom 20% of Americans, according to the Federal Reserve. The advent of Trump has also made the struggle of low-income families with healthcare bills even harder. The number of kids without health insurance jumped by 425,000 between 2017 and 2018 when, according to the Census Bureau, 4.3 million children lacked coverage.



Even before Donald Trump’s election, only one-sixth of eligible families with kids received assistance for childcare and a paltry one-fifth got housing subsidies. Yet his administration arrived prepared to put programs that helped some of them pay for housing and childcare on the chopping block. 



https://countercurrents.org/2020/02/the-shame-of-child-poverty-in-the-age-of-trump

Capitalism is wrong



Reform struggles under capitalism to improve the lives and conditions of the people are important in themselves. But they should not be seen as a means to a socialist end. The struggle for reforms limits the capitalists in their relentless drive to intensify exploitation of the working class. Material gains in our share of the social product and advances in democratic rights give workers a stronger base from which to fight. But the same time, the socialist objective is beyond immediate reforms. We know that capitalism is fundamentally incapable of satisfying even many of the most immediate requirements of the people, especially in times of periodic recession a and because of capitalism’s inherent drives for greater productivity and profitability. 


Capitalism kills and cripples millions in its wars, in class strife and civil war, in hunger and freezing, in industrial accidents and disease, in malnutrition and child labor, in poverty and crime. It destroys the wealth of society and wastes the labour potential of millions of unemployed or under-employed. 


Capitalism pits worker against worker in bidding for a job. It pits Capitalist against capitalist in fighting for profits. It pits workers against capitalist in class struggle. It pits capitalist nation against capitalist nation in war, white against black, native born against foreigner. It is the system of COMPETITION – It is the system of dog eat dog, of each person for oneself. As Karl Liebknecht pointed out “The basic law of capitalism is you or I, not you and I.”


Capitalism is a system of society where all means of production, factories, mines, railroads, are in the hands of private owners called capitalists, while labor power is a commodity which has to be sold to the owners of wealth for use in production in order that the worker may make a living. This class division into capitalists holding or controlling all the wealth, and workers owning nothing but their labour power which they are compelled to sell for a livelihood, is to be found in every phase of capitalist society; modern capitalism, however, is characterised, not only by this division, but by a staggering concentration of wealth. It is the corporation that now owns and operates industries. Employers use you to make profit. How is this profit possible at all? Because he makes you work more than is necessary to defray your wages. In other words, when you work you are not only reproducing the value of your own up keep but you are also producing surplus value which goes to the owner. The longer the working day, the more surplus value you produce. The quicker the pace of your work, the more surplus value you produce within a given time. The capitalist will sell the produced commodity in the market. He will sell it at the price fixed, not by himself individually, but by the corporation of which he is a part. If he can produce more cheaply than his neighbour, his profits will be larger. This is why he drives you on to work faster and faster. This is why he introduces new technology to displace labour and increases unemployment. The capitalist calls it innovation and progress. But what he is thinking about is profits. Every other manufacturer thinks of profits. Every other manufacturer works his workers ever faster and introduces newer and better machinery. The result is that ever greater numbers of workers are being displaced, while the production capacity of the plants is enormously increased. 


This is the madness called capitalism. The numbers of actually employed workers grow smaller. The production capacity of the factories and plants grows bigger. The wages of the workers are being cut in order that the employers may get bigger profits, but together with this the purchasing power of the population decreases. Mass production goes on at breakneck speed, while the market shrinks. It seems inconceivable that anything like this should be carried on by reasonable human beings.


This is not an accident. It is the outcome of an insane system where wealth is owned, not by those who produce it, but by those who do not produce anything, who have amassed it out of the work of others under the protection of the law; a system where production is directed, not towards satisfying human wants, but towards making profits for the owners of wealth; a system where productive capacity increases vastly while the purchasing power of the people is being slashed through cuts in wages and through the exploitation of the working farmers by the large corporations; a system where the primary purpose of labour — to satisfy the basic needs of humanity — is completely lost sight of in the scramble for bigger fortunes, for fatter share prices and dividends. Where there exists capitalism, this situation is inevitable.


This is capitalism. This is capitalist civilisation. Expansion made possible by killing and maiming huge masses of innocent people. Scientific advance made to serve the purpose of destruction. Security for the non-producers; starvation for the producers. The parasites held in great esteem while the workers downtrodden and despised. A palace built for a few at the price of blood and tears of the many.


Must that be? 


The Socialist Party say it must not. We say this huge waste of human energy and human resources, this colossal amount of human suffering, this humiliation of starving in the midst of plenty, this living in on the dumping grounds of big cities at a time when humanity knows already how to build decent housing, this fiasco which is worse than war and pestilence, can be avoided. Life can be made liveable. Life can be made a continuous and uninterrupted stream of work and cultural growth. This can be achieved only by the working class arising to take over and organise society on a new basis. This basis is to be socialism.





10 forgotten humanitarian crises worldwide

Madagascar Hungry and forgotten 



Eritrea
Fleeing drought and repression




Zambia
On the frontline of climate change




Kenya
Trapped in the middle of floods  and droughts 




Ethiopia A vicious cycle of disaster, hunger and displacement 



Central African Republic
A brutal conflict in the heart of Africa

Democratic People’s  Republic of Korea Hunger behind locked doors 




Burundi Instability fuelling a humanitarian crisis 



Burkina Faso
A silent humanitarian catastrophe 




Lake Chad Basin
Ten years of armed conflict, displacement and hunger 







https://insights.careinternational.org.uk/media/k2/attachments/CARE_Suffering-in-silence-2019.pdf

February’s Public Meetings

MANCHESTER

Saturday 22 February, 2.00 p.m.

Public meeting: “Where Charity Begins and Why It Should End”

Venue: Friends Meeting House, 6 Mount Street, Manchester, United Kingdom M2 5NS

Meet before the meeting at 1.15 p.m. in the Central Library café on St Peter’s Square for lunch, coffee or a chat.

LONDON

Saturday 29 February, 2.00 p.m.

Public meeting: “What should socialists do now: Socialist principles and policy”.

Venue: Friends Meeting House, 20 Nigel Playfair Rd (off King St, at Town Hall), London W6 9JF (nearest tubes: Hammersmith or Ravenscourt Park)