Freedom is Slavery

Brother Malcolm

2006-05-20T01:28:00.000-07:00

It was the great mans birthday yesterday, he would have been 81.

Happy Birthday El-Hajj Malik El-Shabazz

"You can’t drive a knife into a man’s back nine inches, pull it out six inches, and call it progress."

"I believe there will ultimately be a clash between the oppressed and those doing the oppressing. I believe that there will be a clash between those who want freedom, justice and equality for everyone and those who want to continue the system of exploitation. I believe that there will be that kind of clash, but I dont think it will be based on the colour of the skin."

"Don't be in a hurry to condemn because he doesn't do what you do or think as you think or as fast. There was a time when you didn't know what you know today. "

"There is no better than adversity. Every defeat, every heartbreak, every loss, contains its own seed, its own lesson on how to improve your performance the next time. "

"You can't separate peace from freedom because no one can be at peace unless he has his freedom. "

“The future belongs to those who prepare for it today”

“We are living in an era of revolution, and the revolt of the American Negro is part of the rebellion against oppression and colonialism which has characterized this era....It is incorrect to classify the revolt of the Negro as simply a racial conflict of Black against white, or as a purely American problem. Rather, we are today seeing a global rebellion of the oppressed against the oppressor, the exploited against the exploiter.”

“You can’t operate a capitalistic system unless you are vulturistic. You show me a capitalist, I’ll show you a bloodsucker.”

“No religion will ever make me forget the conditions of our people in this country, No God, no religion, no nothing will make me forget it until it stops, until it’s finished, until it’s eliminated. I want to make that point clear.”

"Without education, you are not going anywhere in this world."

"You're not to be so blind with patriotism that you can't face reality. Wrong is wrong, no matter who does it or says it."

"Be peaceful, be courteous, obey the law, respect everyone; but if someone puts his hand on you, send him to the cemetery."

"Nobody can give you freedom. Nobody can give you equality or justice or anything. If you're a man, you take it."

"You can't separate peace from freedom because no one can be at peace unless he has his freedom."

"We want freedom by any means necessary. We want justice by any means necessary. We want equality by any means necessary."

"Anytime you beg another man to set you free, you will never be free. Freedom is something that you have to do for yourself."

"Usually when people are sad, they don't do anything. They just cry over their condition. But when they get angry, they bring about a change."

Scotland, nationalism or socialism?

2005-12-04T11:38:00.000-08:00

“Bourgeois nationalism and proletarian internationalism are two implacably opposed slogans, corresponding to two great class camps throughout the entire capitalist world and expressing two policies (rather, two world outlooks) on the national question.”

The wise words of Vladimir Lenin remain as relevant as ever to the revolutionary class warriors of Today, Lenin’s outlook was always one of concrete class politics and revolutionary optimism. In particular his writings on the national question should be studied carefully as we look past a newly emerging barrage of flag waving patriots to find a genuine, rational and realistic solution to the question of independence in Scotland.

It is impossible to understand the nature of the national question without first understanding the nature of the class question, the class system and capitalism. To attempt to find a solution to the national question without making a class based analysis, would be the equivalent of trying to climb Ben Nevis without the necessary equipment, clothing and adequate experience. In other words it is impossible, and can only seek to lead us up the blind alley of petit-bourgeois nationalism.

Let me be perfectly clear, I understand the nature of the imperialist British Empire, I understand that its break up is essential to the building of a socialist society in Scotland, England, Wales and Ireland. But I am a firm believer that any ideas of a “two stage” process towards an independent capitalist nation, which puts socialism on the agenda “later” (in other words “never”) should always be avoided like the plague by socialists in Scotland, or anywhere else for that matter.

We should never be fooled in to thinking that we can find solutions to any problems under capitalism, we should be equally as dismissive when we are told that the dreams of romantic old nationalists can further our cause as workers fighting for class liberation. We must face the problem as it stands, we are socialists struggling for a socialist society, this is the class war, our task is the emancipation of our class and the liquidation of the class system, this struggle is not between English and Scottish, Irish or Welsh, this struggle is not a struggle of nationalities or nations.

There is only one flag that merits our devotion and loyalty, and that flag is neither the Saltire nor is it the Union Jack, the peoples flag, as the old song goes, is deepest red.

Comrades, we must not change its colour now.

Socialism in one country?

2005-11-23T09:31:00.000-08:00

Socialism in one country? Is it possible?

I think before deciding on an answer to this question we must establish and agree that socialism means the same thing to each of us. For example, some people might claim that Belarus or Zimbabwe were “socialist” and thus to them “socialism” is possible in one country because it exists.

However, I am theoretically very close to Lenin, Marx and Engels when defining socialism, and so I would claim that although we could see socialism being “built” in one or few countries, we could never see it’s completion, because the only hope for any nation that is constructing socialism lies in the victory of the international socialist revolution and the international proletariat.

If socialism were being constructed in one, or few nations it would be useless and damaging to start declaring that “socialism has been built” – “socialism has been victorious” – “socialism exists” because as we witnessed in the USSR the global pressures of imperialism will never allow the co-existence of socialism and imperialism and the final victory of one over the other is required to end this debate once and for all.

If I were to put it metaphorically, with this rather crude example, imagine the runner of a very long marathon, he has been in the lead for quite some time but competition behind him is heating up, nevertheless he keeps his lead, should he then stop to declare that he is winning? And take the credit and applause for leading the marathon at this stage? Whilst also letting his opponents gain vital ground on him? Or should he continue, focused with his goal in mind to complete the marathon as the leader and the victor?

Anyway, let us look at some definitions of socialism.

"The organisation of society in such a manner that any individual, man or woman, finds at birth equal means for the development of their respective faculties and the utilisation of their labour. The organisation of society in such a manner that the exploitation by one person of the labour of his neighbour would be impossible, and where everyone will be allowed to enjoy the social wealth only to the extent of their contribution to the production of that wealth." August Bebel
Die Frau und der Sozialismus

"Now and then the workers are victorious, but only for a time. The real fruit of their battles lie not in the immediate result, but in the ever expanding union of the workers. This union is helped on by the improved means of communication that are created by Modern Industry, and that place the workers of different localities in contact with one another. It was just this contact that was needed to centralize the numerous local struggles, all of the same character, into one national struggle between classes.

"The essential conditions for the existence and for the sway of the bourgeois class is the formation and augmentation of capital; the condition for capital is wage labor. Wage labor rests exclusively on competition between the laborers. The advance of industry, whose involuntary promoter is the bourgeoisie, replaces the isolation of the laborers, due to competition, by the revolutionary combination, due to association. The development of Modern Industry, therefore, cuts from under its feet the very foundation on which the bourgeoisie produces and appropriates products. What the bourgeoisie therefore produces, above all, are its own grave-diggers.

"And the abolition of this state of things is called by the bourgeois, abolition of individuality and freedom! And rightly so. The abolition of bourgeois individuality, bourgeois independence, and bourgeois freedom is undoubtedly aimed at. ("These measures will, of course, be different in different countries. Nevertheless, in most advanced countries, the following will be generally applicable.")

1. Abolition of property in land and application of all rents of land to public purposes.

2. A heavy progressive or graduated income tax.

3. Abolition of all rights of inheritance.

4. Confiscation of the property of all emigrants and rebels.

5. Centralization of credit in the banks of the state, by means of a national bank with state capital and an exclusive monopoly.

6. Centralization of the means of communication and transport in the hands of the state.

7. Extension of factories and instruments of production owned by the state; the bringing into cultivation of waste lands, and the improvement of the soil generally in accordance with a common plan.

8. Equal obligation of all to work. Establishment of industrial armies, especially for agriculture.

9. Combination of agriculture with manufacturing industries; gradual abolition of all the distinction between town and country by a more equable distribution of the populace over the country.

10. Free education for all children in public schools. Abolition of children's factory labor in its present form. Combination of education with industrial production, etc.
Karl Marx and Fredrick Engels
The Communist Manifesto Chapter 1 and Chapter 2

"The question then arises: What transformation will the state undergo in communist society? In other words, what social functions will remain in existence there that are analogous to present state functions?
"Between capitalist and communist society there lies the period of the revolutionary transformation of the one into the other. Corresponding to this is also a political transition period in which the state can be nothing but the revolutionary dictatorship of the proletariat.
Karl Marx
Critique of the Gotah Programme Part IV: On Democracy

"The dictatorship of a single class is necessary not only for every class society in general, not only for the proletariat which has overthrown the bourgeoisie, but also for the entire historical period which separates capitalism from "classless society", from communism. Bourgeois states are most varied in form, but their essence is the same: all these states, whatever their form, in the final analysis are inevitably the dictatorship of the bourgeoisie. The transition from capitalism to communism is certainly bound to yield a tremendous abundance and variety of political forms, but the essence will inevitably be the same: the dictatorship of the proletariat.
Vladimir Lenin
The State and Revolution Chpt 2.

"What we have to deal with here is a communist society, not as it has developed on its own foundations, but, on the contrary, just as it emerges from capitalist society; which is thus in every respect, economically, morally, and intellectually, still stamped with the birthmarks of the old society from whose womb it emerges.
"Accordingly, the individual producer receives back from society – after the deductions have been made – exactly what he gives to it..." "But one man is superior to another physically, or mentally, and supplies more labor in the same time, or can labor for a longer time; and labor, to serve as a measure, must be defined by its duration or intensity, otherwise it ceases to be a standard of measurement... "Right, by its very nature, can consist only in the application of an equal standard; but unequal individuals (and they would not be different individuals if they were not unequal) are measurable only by an equal standard insofar as they are brought under an equal point of view, are taken from one definite side only – for instance... one worker is married, another is not; one has more children than another, and so on and so forth. Thus, with an equal performance of labor, and hence an equal in the social consumption fund, one will in fact receive more than another, one will be richer than another, and so on. To avoid all these defects, right, instead of being equal, would have to be unequal."
Karl Marx
Critique of the Gotha Programme Part 1

"The first phase of communism, therefore, cannot yet provide justice and equality; differences, and unjust differences in wealth will still persist, but the exploitation of man by man will have become impossible because it will be impossible to seize the means of production – the factories, machines, land, etc. – and make them private property.... Marx shows the course of development of communist society....which [firstly] consists in the distribution of consumer goods "according to the amount of labor performed" (and not [yet] according to needs)."
"But the scientific distinction between socialism and communism is clear. What is usually called socialism was termed by marx the "first", or lower, phase of communist society. Insofar as the means of production becomes common property, the word "communism" is also applicable here, providing we do not forget that this is not complete communism."
Vladimir Lenin
The State and Revolution Chpt. 5:
The first phase of Communist Society

"Socialism in one country?" The view of Engels

"Will it be possible for this revolution to take place in one country alone?

No. By creating the world market, big industry has already brought all the peoples of the Earth, and especially the civilized peoples, into such close relation with one another that none is independent of what happens to the others.

Further, it has co-ordinated the social development of the civilized countries to such an extent that, in all of them, bourgeoisie and proletariat have become the decisive classes, and the struggle between them the great struggle of the day. It follows that the communist revolution will not merely be a national phenomenon but must take place simultaneously in all civilized countries – that is to say, at least in England, America, France, and Germany.

It will develop in each of the these countries more or less rapidly, according as one country or the other has a more developed industry, greater wealth, a more significant mass of productive forces. Hence, it will go slowest and will meet most obstacles in Germany, most rapidly and with the fewest difficulties in England. It will have a powerful impact on the other countries of the world, and will radically alter the course of development which they have followed up to now, while greatly stepping up its pace.

It is a universal revolution and will, accordingly, have a universal range."
(Engels, The Principles of Communism)

"Socialism in one country?" The view of Lenin

Lenin’s view, like my own, was that socialism could be built in one country but its final victory lay at the hands of the world socialist revolution. To support this claim I provide some quotes from Lenin himself. I have also come across one particular quote from Lenin that contradicts these remarks, and claims that it would be possible to see the victory of socialism in “one or few countries” – one the one hand, if this became his view (it certainly wasn’t in 1917 I’m sure) then he was proven wrong with the collapse of the USSR, on the other hand I’d really like to see this quote in its full context so if anyone is going to provide it (I don’t have it myself) it would be better if it were posted in its entirety.

"We are far from having completed even the transitional period from capitalism to socialism. We have never cherished the hope that we could finish it without the aid of the international proletariat. We never had any illusions on that score The final victory of socialism in a single country is of course impossible. Our contingent of workers and peasants which is upholding Soviet power is one of the contingents of the great world army, which at present has been split by the world war, but which is striving for unity We can now see clearly how far the development of the Revolution will go. The Russian began it - the German, the Frenchman and the Englishman will finish it, and socialism will be victorious." (LCW, Vol. 26, pp. 465-72.)

"The Congress considers the only reliable guarantee of the consolidation of the socialist revolution that has been victorious in Russia to be its conversion into a world working-class revolution." (LCW, from Resolution on War and Peace, Vol. 27. p. 119.)

"We shall achieve final victory only when we succeed at last in conclusively smashing international imperialism, which relies on the tremendous strength of its equipment and discipline. But we shall achieve victory only together with all the workers of other countries, of the whole world" (LCW, Vol. 27, p. 231.)

"To wait until the working classes carry out a revolution on an international scale means that everyone will remain suspended in mid-air It may begin with brilliant success in one country and then go through agonising periods, since final victory is only possible on a world scale, and only by the joint efforts of the workers of all countries." (LCW, Vol. 27, pp. 372-3.)

"We never harboured the illusion that the forces of the proletariat and the revolutionary people of any one country, however heroic and however organised and disciplined they might be, could overthrow international imperialism. That can be done only by the joint efforts of the workers of the world We never deceived ourselves into thinking this could be done by the efforts of one country alone. We knew that our efforts were inevitably leading to a worldwide revolution, and that the war begun by the imperialist governments could not be stopped by the efforts of those governments themselves. It can be stopped only by the efforts of all workers; and when we came to power, our task was to retain that power, that torch of socialism, so that it might scatter as many sparks as possible to add to the growing flames of socialist revolution." (LCW, Vol. 28, pp. 24-5.)

"From the very beginning of the October Revolution, foreign policy and international relations have been the main question facing us. Not merely because from now on all the states of the world are being firmly linked by imperialism into one, dirty, bloody mass, but because the complete victory of the socialist revolution in one country alone is inconceivable and demands the most active co-operation of at least several advanced countries, which do not include Russia We have never been so near to world proletarian revolution as we are now. We have proved we were not mistaken in banking on world proletarian revolution Even if they crush one country, they can never crush the world proletarian revolution, they will only add fuel to the flames that will consume them all." (LCW, Vol. 28, pp. 151-64.)

"The transformation of our Russian Revolution into a socialist revolution was not a dubious venture but a necessity, for there was no other alternative: Anglo-French and American imperialism will inevitably destroy the independence and freedom of Russia if the world socialist revolution, world Bolshevism, does not triumph." (LCW, Vol. 28, p. 188.)

"Complete and final victory on a world scale cannot be achieved in Russia alone; it can be achieved only when the proletariat is victorious in at least all the advanced countries, or, at all events, in some of the largest of the advanced countries. Only then shall we be able to say with absolute confidence that the cause of the proletariat has triumphed, that our first objective - the overthrow of capitalism - has been achieved. We have achieved this objective in one country, and this confronts us with a second task. Since Soviet power has been established, since the bourgeoisie has been overthrown in one country, the second task in to wage the struggle on a world scale, on a different plane, the struggle of the proletarian state surrounded by capitalist states." (LCW, Vol. 29, pp. 151-64.)

"Both prior to October and during the October Revolution, we always said that we regard ourselves and can only regard ourselves as one of the contingents of the international proletarian army We always said that the victory of the socialist revolution therefore, can only be regarded as final when it becomes the victory of the proletariat in at least several advanced countries." (LCW, Vol. 30, pp. 207-8.)

"The Mensheviks assert that we are pledged to defeating the world bourgeoisie on our own. We have, however, always said that we are only a single link in the chain of the world revolution, and have never set ourselves the aim of achieving victory by our own means." (LCW, Vol. 31, p. 431.)

"But we have not finished building even the foundations of socialist economy and the hostile powers of moribund capitalism can still deprive us of that. We must clearly appreciate this and frankly admit it; for there is nothing more dangerous than illusions And there is absolutely nothing terrible in admitting this bitter truth; for we have always urged and reiterated the elementary truth of Marxism - that the joint efforts of the workers of several advanced countries are needed for the victory of socialism." (LCW, Vol. 33, p. 206.)

Hands off Venezuela Campaign kicks off in Fife

2005-10-30T05:40:00.000-08:00

On Friday 28th October a successful meeting of ten people was held in Newburgh, Fife, to discuss the Bolivarian revolution and the formation of a local committee in solidarity with our Venezuelan brothers and sisters.

A video screening of the documentary “the revolution will not be televised” took place to give a detailed background of the 2001 coup against president Chavez, and a general overview of the current political climate in Venezuela.

Afterwards, Pablo Shanchez from the Hands off Venezuela Campaign gave a short lead off, briefly filling in the gaps between the events of 2001 to the present day. In this period we have witnessed another electoral victory for Chavez, the nationalisation of many factories under workers control, and also the regrouping of the opposition as they prepare a new wave of attacks to defeat the revolution.

An interesting discussion then took place where many questions were asked and comrades shared their thoughts and opinions of the future of the Bolivarian revolution and it’s relevance to those of us fighting for the socialist transformation of society in Scotland and elsewhere.

It was agreed that we would meet again in November for a screening of the film “Venezuela Bolivariano” and to discuss the next stages of building the campaign in Fife and the surrounding area.

The general mood of the meeting was extremely positive and afterwards everyone present signed up to become a member of the campaign, which Hugo Chavez himself has praised for it’s outstanding work internationally in fighting for solidarity with the Bolivarian revolution.

Anyone interested in getting involved with the HoV activities in Fife should email me at hov_fife@marxismonline.com

It’s just “human nature”…

2005-09-20T10:42:00.000-07:00

There are many arguments used against those who advocate the socialist transformation of society, this we can put down to the relentless onslaught of the bourgeois and their capitalist system which is terrified of the revolutionary ideas of Marxism and the liberation of the working class. One such argument that finds many supporters in the ranks of the unconscious working class is that of “human nature”, we must expose this argument as the falsification that it is, but as always we must be prepared, as Lenin said, to “patiently explain”.

Certainly it is not uncommon for people to believe that a “natural human greed” may be present in our genetic make up. Such a thought is so widely claimed in this society that it might seem “perfectly normal” to someone who hasn’t given it a second thought.

This supposed “natural greed” can, and is used to justify so many things that happen in the world. Murders, robberies and wars, we put it all down to the general nastiness of the human being. It’s very strange though because when we see opposing examples of human behaviour, such as a heroic act to save someone’s life, or people contributing voluntary work to a good cause we do not make any reference to “human nature”, we might choose instead to claim that these are “good people” and very different from the “bad people” who kill and steal.

It is said that capitalism is a “natural” economic system, this claim is shattered by the fact that capitalism has only existed for a tiny fraction of the existence of human beings. All economic systems are part of the laws of historical development. As Engels explained during our evolution from the ape, Man came out of the trees which freed the hand for things such as hunting and making tools, which in turn lead to increased labour. Through labour new methods were established through time, the emergence of differences in classes took place, each system from primitive communism, to serfdom, to feudalism has came and went through the ages. Capitalism is no exception to this, and the idea of a future socialist society is something that must be prepared for today.

The truth is, there is no such thing as a naturally “good” or “bad” person. Each person’s character and being is shaped by the many factors around him or her from the day of their birth. As Marx said “conditions determine consciousness”, an extremely important factor in the conditions around a person would be the economic system around them. This system that will determine if poverty exists, if they are employed or unemployed, if they are in debt, if they are poor, or if they are wealthy, perhaps they sell their labour power to survive, perhaps they employ workers to make money. These are all vital factors, and combined they shape and mould the people who live under them. Capitalism is a profit-based greed operated system, and therefore those existing within it will always repeat these qualities on various scales. From stealing a television, to embezzling millions of pounds, these crimes are a reflection of society itself.

Ultimately, as humans, the main “natural” quality we have, as with all mammals, is a will to survive. In order to survive we are no longer required to compete against eachother to live. The capitalist system in its productive era has made it possible for all of mankind to enjoy a comfortable lifestyle without poverty or famine. But capitalism now holds us back. The fact that there is enough on earth to provide a good life for all is cancelled out by the fact that too much wealth is concentrated in the hands of too few people. The class system that operates the capitalist system will not allow a good standard of living for all – it could not, it would self destruct.

Some people have said that you cannot give the workers power – they are too greedy. I say we are not greedy enough! Is it not the case that we toil and struggle, not for the fruits of our labour but only for a fraction of what it is worth? Is it not true that whilst we struggle the wealth produced by our labour is enjoyed by a minority of others? Effectively we contribute in the running of a system that enriches others and exploits ourselves. That is not greed, it is naivety. We must overcome this naivety by standing up as workers and revolutionaries, to show the way forward towards a new and better life for all, towards an international brotherhood of man, a world of socialism and peace.

Cleaning up after capitalism

2005-09-10T03:38:00.000-07:00

Only a workers dictatorship has the strength to solve the problems caused by capitalism.

In every town and city, from housing estates to town centres we witness daily scenes of intimidation, thuggery, violence, vandalism, drug dealing and all sorts of other problems that can make life in urban areas very unpleasant for all. These problems prevent us from achieving a good and fair society for all, but these problems are not ‘natural’ occurrences that one could put down to general ‘human badness’, these problems are the problems of the capitalist system and its class division.

It is frequently claimed by those on the right that the state must “get tough” on these offenders, yet the “tougher” governments get the more the crimes seem to happen. Instead of taking the same reactionary knee jerk reaction as our conservative opponents, let us first try to trace the problem to its roots. We are of course logical people seeking a logical and practical solution, we cannot achieve this without first understanding exactly what we are dealing with.

Crime is a natural product of poverty, poverty and unemployment are a fertile breeding ground for all sorts of crime.

Unemployment is a product of the free market (capitalism). Nobody has the 'right' to a job since society relies largely on businesses as employers to employ workers. Businesses will always employ the minimum amount of workers it possibly can to maximise profit, this causes unemployment.

Unemployment, combined with the class system, low wages and poor living conditions cause poverty. We also see a growing class of what Marx described as Lumpenproletariat We find an excellent definition in the Encyclopaedia of Marxism

Roughly translated as slum workers or the mob, this term identifies the class of outcast, degenerated and submerged elements that make up a section of the population of industrial centers. It includes beggars, prostitutes, gangsters, racketeers, swindlers, petty criminals, tramps, chronic unemployed or unemployables, persons who have been cast out by industry, and all sorts of declassed, degraded or degenerated elements. In times of prolonged crisis (depression), innumerable young people also, who cannot find an opportunity to enter into the social organism as producers, are pushed into this limbo of the outcast. Here demagogues and fascists of various stripes find some area of the mass base in time of struggle and social breakdown, when the ranks of the Lumpenproletariat are enormously swelled by ruined and declassed elements from all layers of a society in decay.

Large amounts of crime are caused by this class. Can the capitalist system and its governments tackle this problem though? Of course not. No matter how “tough” they handle individual or collective situations they remain the actual cause of the problem itself by maintaining the class system and ultimately causing such lower classes to exist in the first place.

As revolutionary socialists we desire to overthrow the capitalist system and replace it with a workers government, which in its early stages will be a dictatorship of the working class. Because our labour power already runs society we can organise ourselves in such a way that we do not require businesses and corporations to employ workers, the workers state owns and controls the means of production itself, planning society and moving it forwards towards the liquidation of the class system.

The problems left over from centuries of capitalism will be left in the hands of the workers government. We have no choice but to solve these problems. Like our conservative opponents we must be “tough”, the difference being we will deal with the causes of the problem to ensure that it cannot continue. We are of course left over with an “end product” of the old order, a large group of people who ultimately have been failed by the capitalist society and have resorted to crimes of all nature to live. We would not be socialists if we did not offer these people a chance to contribute to society in the cause of socialism, and to live without want or need. But we should tread with caution, and any efforts made to sabotage or undermine the stability of our rule should be dealt with swiftly and harshly.

The only way to abolish this class - a class which can be just as dangerous to socialism as the old ruling classes – is to destroy the class system through the implementation of a workers dictatorship. The establishment of this dictatorship remains our main task today as revolutionaries in a capitalist system, but we should not be afraid to openly state our aims and intentions of how we intend to solve the countless day to day problems that will always be used in arguments against us as “proof” that our ideas and cause are little more than a utopian dream.

We are not dreamers, we are practical realists, seeking a real and practical solution. Let’s make this perfectly clear as we continue to move forward towards a new system that can provide a good and fair life for all, leaving behind all the old rubbish of today that has ruined so many lives and will continue to do so, so long as the cause of the problem is allowed to exist.

Letter to the Republican Socialist Youth Movement of Ireland

2005-08-26T20:28:00.000-07:00

Comrades of the RSYM

I extend my warmest comradely greetings to you, in your struggle against imperialism and for a united Ireland controlled by the working class. Malcolm X once said “the future belongs to those who prepare for it today”, this is absolutely true, and I cannot stress enough the importance of young socialists building, organising, educating and preparing for the colossal struggles ahead.

You will raise the banner as your comrades did before you, from Connolly to Sands, the traditions and heart of the Irish republicans is stronger than the arms and wealth of any imperialist state. United, the working class can never be defeated, and united we will be.

In solidarity from Scotland.

Tiocfaidh ár la

The Preachers of Hate

2005-08-25T08:02:00.000-07:00

Imperialist hypocrisy and Christian fundamentalism

There has been much talk from the Western ruling classes, particularly in the UK about cracking down on “preachers of hate” who are seen to be inciting or condoning terrorist attacks at home and abroad.

It’s certainly true that religious fundamentalism has played a colossal role in bringing the planet to the extremely unstable circumstances we find ourselves in today. Hundreds of thousands of civilians have died as these crusaders have waged war after war in the name of their God and the empty slogan of “freedom, democracy and liberation”, although these religious fundamentalists are far from the stereotypical Islamic preacher, no these fundamentalists wear smart suits and ties, and from the heart of their stronghold in the White House their messages of intolerance and hate can be heard in every country in every continent on this Earth.

The recent comments of US television evangelist Pat Robertson - a close ally of the Bush administration - are a perfect example of preaching hate and terrorism to the masses. It is his view that the US government should “take out” (assassinate) Hugo Chavez – the democratically elected president of Venezuela – because he presents “a terrific danger” to the US, and presumably to “World Peace” (roughly translated this newspeak means he is a threat to our system and our profit).

Although the White House have been quick to distance themselves from Robertson’s comments (they say it is his “private view”) he is saying exactly the same as they are thinking, and have been thinking for the past 5 years. It is no secret that the CIA have tried for years to kill Chavez’s close Cuban ally Fidel Castro, and judging by the amount of failed attempts to oust Chavez they would have no qualms about putting a bullet through his head at the first opportunity.

The most ridiculous idea of all, is that these great Christians actually believe that killing a Man can halt the red tide sweeping Latin America – they sincerely believe that this is the doing of one or two individuals, and thus we see their childish and simplistic logic in all its pathetic and hopeless glory – these people who rule and control the world are little more than brainwashed psychopaths and lunatics.

The killing will halt nothing – apart from their hugely important oil supply!

Staying with Robertson though, if he is entitled to air this “private view” – especially live on US television, how can we possibly talk about “cracking down on preachers of hate” in the UK when the supposed Land of the Free are letting them preach hate in public without so much as a slap on the wrist.

The hard facts are that imperialism is not serious about “cracking down” on anything other than the working classes who are the source of their wealth – and the greatest danger to their system!

The empty rhetoric about “anti-terrorism” laws are only there to scare us into a state of mass panic and fear so that in turn the governments can take away more and more of our rights and liberties (for our own protection of course).

If these mouthpieces of imperialism were genuinely interested in the prevention of terrorism then they might want to start by withdrawing the troops from the countries they have invaded and occupied for purely economic benefits.

But they are not, and that is precisely why – they represent profit, profit by any means necessary – that is capitalism, that is imperialism. This system cannot fight terrorism when it is the cause of terrorism!

They will even go as far to refer to those in Iraq who are taking up arms to defend themselves as “terrorists” – in fact the same bourgeoisie newspapers who have consistently defended farmer Tony Martin who shot dead a burglar in his own home, have the downright hypocrisy to say that those defending themselves from foreign troops who are raping and plundering their cities and towns are terrorists and insurgents. These gutter rags are all for ‘self defence’ but this law is conveniently left out when it comes to the invasion of a country and not just a single house in the UK.

But can we expect anymore from the lackeys and cheerleaders of this barbaric, decaying system in its death agonies? The answer is quite simply No. We must continue to fight, united through our class and our labour power for the establishment of a socialist society that can end the torture, hypocrisy and brutality alive on Earth today - forwards to workers internationalism and forwards to socialism.

Venezuela’s Bolivarian Revolution

2005-08-11T12:01:00.000-07:00

A modern day socialist revolution

When we speak of revolutions, and in particular socialist revolutions, we are immediately prone to discussing events like the Russian revolution of 1917 or the Paris Commune of 1871. These of course were great events, hugely significant to the movement and should be studied carefully. However, if we are to speak of revolution in the present day then we can look towards Latin America, and in particular Venezuela for a prime example of the masses taking direct control over their lives.

The left populist president Hugo Chavez was elected in 1998 in an unexpected landslide victory. Venezuela is a country rich in resources and is a large oil supplier to the United States. Yet, under capitalism the wealth of the country did not filter down to those who worked, the state run oil company was managed like a private company and it’s aim was to line the pockets of managers and other such bureaucrats. Chavez promised to use the wealth and resources of Venezuela to tackle poverty, illiteracy and other problems facing the Venezuelan people. Instantly this set him on a collision course with the oligarchy that have lived so well sucking the working class dry, and of course US imperialism which correctly saw Chavez and his followers as a great threat to their interests in Latin America and worldwide.

Gains of the revolution

The Venezuelan revolution is unique in a sense, the fact that an elected government has played extremely positive role acting as a catalyst for change is something that is rarely, if ever seen. Since the election of Hugo Chavez in 1998 many tremendous gains have been won for the people of Venezuela.

One million additional children have been brought into the education system, 657 new schools were built and 36,000 additional teachers hired (the education budget has more than doubled in just two years). Four universities have been created since 1998 and three million people enrolled in literacy and education programs.

2.2 hectares (5.5 million acres) of land have been distributed to 116,000 families organised in co-operatives.

Health programmes have targeted 17 million Venezuelans. With over 13,000 Cuban doctors now in Venezuela, some 1.2 million people who had originally been denied health care have been treated in health centres.

A new Bolivarian Constitution also guarantees the public ownership of Venezuela’s oil and the distribution of wealth to all citizens.

The opposition

We live in the age of imperialism, imperialism being the highest stage of capitalism. Because capitalism still exists in Venezuela, and because of the global nature of imperialism any radical left movements such as the Bolivarian revolution of Venezuela will be naturally opposed by US imperialism and the capitalist classes of Latin America who view the movement as a colossal thread to their comfortable lifestyle (at the expense of workers and indigenous peasants).

It was clear from the start that capitalism would use any means necessary to defend itself by attempting to crush the Bolivarian revolution. If President Chavez was guilty of one thing it might be that he was too soft on the right wingers and money men who financed campaigns against him through the many private television channels of the country, spreading poisonous lies and slander at every opportunity. Chavez - until very recently had relied on one single state television channel to get his message across. The fact that he maintained massive levels of support throughout this speaks words in itself.

The opposition, backed heavily by US imperialism, has tried many dirty underhand tricks to destabilise and overthrow Chavez and crush the revolution. One of the most significant was the Bosses lock outs which began around December of 2001 where major factories and workplaces were closed to the workers in an attempt to ‘create’ a general strike. Whilst these events took place the opposition made further plans, along with the US government to oust Chavez in a Coup d'état.

The coup was carried out following the events of April 11th 2002, when a demonstration said to be 350,000-strong was organised against the Chavez government. Since the media in Venezuela are virulently anti-Chavez, this figure is almost certainly exaggerated. Press agency reports put the real number as no more than 50,000. Government security forces and pro-Chavez militia were alleged to have fired into a crowd of unarmed anti-Chavez protesters, killing 15 and wounding 157 people. The right wing used this as an excuse to demand the resignation of President Hugo Chavez. But in fact, later reports have indicated that most of those killed were pro-Chavez demonstrators who were apparently shot by snipers on rooftops. The whole thing was a manifest provocation.

The class interests behind the coup were obvious. The head of the counter-revolutionary government was a wealthy businessman, Pedro Carmona - the chief of the bosses' association. His first action was to rescind Chavez's so-called anti-investment laws - that is, all those laws intended to defend Venezuela's interests and raise the living standards of the masses. The corrupt and rotten Venezuelan bourgeoisie is incapable of playing a progressive role. Its plans would signify putting the country and its considerable oil wealth firmly in the grasp of US imperialism. The PDVSA managers had already drawn up a plan for restoring and expanding production that could bring Venezuela 300,000 barrels per day above its OPEC quota.

Defeat of the Coup

The anger and astonishment of the Venezuelan masses and supporters of Chavez sparked immediate protests all over the country and in particular in Caracas. It wasn’t long before hundreds of thousands of people had gathered outside the presidential palace demanding the return of Chavez, the Man they had democratically chosen to lead the country.

As the newly formed and self proclaimed ‘government’ inside grew increasingly concerned and began to argue as the wheels came off their plan, a number of soldiers inside the palace who had remained loyal to Chavez decided to take action, they arrested the feuding coup hopefuls locking most of them up in rooms inside the palace, unfortunately however Carmona and a handful of leading opposition figures managed to escape somehow. The soldiers soon appeared on the palace roof flying the Venezuelan flag to the euphoria of the masses outside. As Chavez’s government ministers began to return one by one plans were made to bring the President back by helicopter from the island in which the opposition had been holding him captive. It wasn’t long before joyful scenes of celebration unfolded as Chavez returned, the opposition had suffered a crushing defeat.

The referendum

As expected, the opposition regrouped and planned their next attack. They aimed to take advantage of the democratic Bolivarian Constitution of Venezuela to collect just under two and a half million signatures which would enable them to force a presidential recall referendum. After much campaigning and controversy – it was reported that they were forging the signatures of mentally ill people and even dead people to further their cause – a referendum was granted by Chavez much to the anger and disappointment of the masses. Although their frustration soon turned to determination as the Bolivarian circles, workers community groups, trade unionists and militant students began to prepare for the election and to deliver another heavy blow to the corrupt and stubborn opposition.

On Monday 16th August 2004 the blow was delivered Chavez had won by a massive 60%. Again it was the key role of the masses that held firm the revolutionary principles and kept Venezuela on track to build a socialist society of workers and peasants democracy. Although the opposition have been battered and bruised by the masses they will not give up, and in order to safeguard the heroic gains of the revolution efforts must be stepped up to abolish capitalism and remove the remaining powers of the vultures who uphold it.

Forwards to socialism

“Everyday I become more convinced, there is no doubt in my mind, and as many intellectuals have said, that it is necessary to transcend capitalism. But capitalism can’t be transcended from within capitalism itself, but through socialism, true socialism, with equality and justice. But I’m also convinced that it is possible to do it under democracy, but not in the type of democracy being imposed from Washington,”

These were the words of President Hugo Chavez recently, reaffirming his growing determination to fight alongside the working classes to rid Venezuela, Latin America and ultimately the entire planet of the rotting, decaying barbaric capitalist system that has long since ran out of any usefulness to mankind as a whole.

This year has seen a much needed move towards the building of socialism with a number of nationalisations taking place in major factories such as Venepal. Moves like these are designed for workplaces to be co-run by the State and the workers and can result in much needed progress and better conditions for all. If we look at a classic example of workers control, the Zanon ceramics factory in Argentina which was originally closed down by the owners claiming it wasn't making enough profit, the plant's former workers simply occupied it themselves and went back to work. Since then the cooperative running the factory, situated in Neuqeun Province in Argentina's Patagonia region, has taken on 50 per cent more workers than was the case under the previous management and overseen a 300 per cent increase in production levels. Workers at the factory have also built a health clinic for the local community, who had waited 20 years for the government to provide such a facility.

Here we witness the magnificent benefits of workers control, but this is just a single factory. When you imagine the possibilities of having an entire country or continent ran in such a manner you will understand why the imperialists are so incredibly terrified and taking such extreme measures to attempt to defeat the revolution before it can reach a point of no return – this would see the permanent defeat of imperialism and an end to poverty and suffering on a worldwide scale. We must throw our weight behind this revolution, not only as the Venezuelan revolution but as the beginning of the worldwide revolution, the final uprising of the working classes and the realization of our dreams of socialism, freedom and liberation.

The Rhythm Of Time

2005-08-09T09:54:00.000-07:00

There's an inner thing in every man,
Do you know this thing my friend?
It has withstood the blows of a million years,
And will do so to the end.

It was born when time did not exist,
And it grew up out of life,
It cut down evil's strangling vines,
Like a slashing searing knife.

It lit fires when fires were not,
And burnt the mind of man,
Tempering leandened hearts to steel,
From the time that time began.

It wept by the waters of Babylon,
And when all men were a loss,
It screeched in writhing agony,
And it hung bleeding from the Cross.

It died in Rome by lion and sword,
And in defiant cruel array,
When the deathly word was 'Spartacus'
Along with Appian Way.

It marched with Wat the Tyler's poor,
And frightened lord and king,
And it was emblazoned in their deathly stare,
As e'er a living thing.

It smiled in holy innocence,
Before conquistadors of old,
So meek and tame and unaware,
Of the deathly power of gold.

It burst forth through pitiful Paris streets,
And stormed the old Bastille,
And marched upon the serpent's head,
And crushed it 'neath its heel.

It died in blood on Buffalo Plains,
And starved by moons of rain,
Its heart was buried in Wounded Knee,
But it will come to rise again.

It screamed aloud by Kerry lakes,
As it was knelt upon the ground,
And it died in great defiance,
As they coldly shot it down.

It is found in every light of hope,
It knows no bounds nor space
It has risen in red and black and white,
It is there in every race.

It lies in the hearts of heroes dead,
It screams in tyrants' eyes,
It has reached the peak of mountains high,
It comes searing 'cross the skies.

It lights the dark of this prison cell,
It thunders forth its might,
It is 'the undauntable thought', my friend,
That thought that says 'I'm right!'

Bobby Sands

The Bobby Sands Trust

Personal Politics Part 2

2005-08-01T10:51:00.000-07:00

A brief history of my political life

The two “militant” elements I can trace in my family come courtesy of my Great Grandfathers on both my Mother and Fathers side. The latter was a militant Fife miner, details of his activity in the socialist movement only recently surfaced when I discovered a photograph of him in John McArthur’s “Militant Miners” book. On my Mothers side, my Great Grandfather was a Communist on Glasgow’s “Red Clydeside”.

His daughter (my Grandmother) had told me a lot of stories about him when I was younger, the one that stuck in my mind was during a visit of the future Queen Elizabeth to Glasgow. She was due to pass through their street in the Gorbals on parade, naturally people were lining the streets and hanging out windows waving Union Jacks and cheering. My Great Grandfather however, had told the family to close the curtains – not only that but they had made a red flag with a hammer and sickle and draped it from the window!

Of course I didn’t really understand the concept of socialism in those days, with my Grandmother being a ‘Catholic Socialist’ (quite a common thing on Red Clydeside) most of the information I got was well meaning, but confused with a heavily religious influence. This left seeds in my head however, and as I started to take a heavy interest in politics at the age of 15 I took great curiosity in the ideas of socialism. I bought some books during a visit to Glasgow, including the “Communist Manifesto”. This inspired me and I developed a thirst for Marxist theory. After reading Lenin’s “The State and Revolution” I felt comfortable with socialist ideas and considered myself to have a basic understanding of the fundamental principles of Marxism.

Coming from a strong Labour supporting family, and after discussions with many groups and parties through the internet I decided to join Socialist Appeal (British section of the International Marxist Tendency) and also the Labour Party. I came to consider myself a Trotskyist and on two occasions I attended socialist youth schools in Barcelona where I met and discussed with comrades from around the globe including Ted Grant, Alan Woods, Manzoor Ahmed and Esteban Volkov. This was a very enlightening period and I was enthusiastic to build and recruit. I became secretary of my Labour Party branch and was able to build links with a number of workers involved in industrial disputes at this time.

Latterly, I dropped the label of “Trotskyist” in favour of a more open “revolutionary socialist” tag, as I realised there were many Stalinists, Maoists etc that were very good people, people who I could get on with and relate to. It made me realise that there are many positives and negatives in all of the ‘categories’ of Marxism, and the sooner historical flame wars about Stalin and Trotsky were replaced by discussions on building for the future to fight for socialism and the defeat of imperialism the better.

As things changed, and as I myself have changed, I decided in July of this year (2005) to resign from both the Marxist Tendency and the Labour Party for reasons stated in my recent appeal to the socialist movement. As I am still only 21 I’m sure there will be plenty more experiences and events for me in the future, as I am unable to predict these this particular piece of writing will have to remain open for me to add to when things occur. Unless of course I get hit by a lorry…

I probably shouldn’t joke!

Death, Destruction and Fear

2005-07-25T10:59:00.000-07:00

But who is to blame for the worsening situation in Britain?

The cold blooded murder of an innocent civilian by armed plain clothed police officers in London last week is the latest in a series of reminders for people that we live in a turbulent and dangerous period.

Following the equally cold blooded terrorist attacks of 7/7 we have witnessed a growing spread of panic and concern among working people who have, so far, been the main victims of these attacks – both from fundamentalist suicide bombers and armed police officers.

These methods of individual terrorism, even if they are paraded by some as “anti-imperialist” have done nothing to harm imperialism, far from it they have gone on to strengthen the foothold of imperialist governments who claim to be “fighting terrorism” and in the process we see the death of a number of innocent working class people who’s crime was simply to be in the wrong place at the wrong time.

To simply blame “extremist terrorists” as the government and its allies in the media have done (in abundance) is not satisfactory in my opinion. Instead of understanding the need to get to the roots of a problem, something that must be done if one is seeking a genuine solution, capitalism as always will hack at the branches in an attempt to divert attention away from the real source.

Has it ever occurred to people like Blair, Clarke or Straw, that the participation of this countries military forces in the invasion and occupation of Iraq, along with the slaughter of thousands of innocent civilians who we claimed to be “liberating” might have just brought the UK forward as a prime area for both the recruitment and indoctrination of ‘extremists’, and a prime target for these groups and individuals to carry out terrorist attacks against it’s citizens?

The answer would be yes, but there is no way in hell that they will ever admit anything of the sort. Instead the puppets of imperialism use these terror attacks (to which they react to with utmost condemnation and horror) to push through a barrage of new anti-working class laws which strip away the ever thinning democratic and civil rights of British people bit by bit.

Whilst the mouthpieces of capitalism condemn the terror attacks on one side, they actively seek to provoke it on the other. Outspoken tabloid vermin such as Richard Littlejohn recently made the comparison between Britain’s Muslim community and Nazi’s of WW2!! This sickening racist attack, and attacks like it, will play in to the hands of extremist groups who seek to exploit largely younger groups of people who are angry at these attacks, and will attempt to recruit new layers that can be trained to carry out further attacks in the future.

In turn, new terrorist attacks take place and the pro-imperialist New Labour government of Tony Blair will be on hand with an endless amount of new “anti-terror” laws which they claim will “protect us”, whilst in reality they are enforced to monitor us, control us and ultimately exploit us through their system of wage labour.

As we witnessed during the G8 summit, Tony Blair and his type regard their safety of the highest importance. They are prepared to surround their selves in agents, officers and even soldiers to protect them from any one of the millions of enemies they must have accumulated on this Earth. They are happy with this way of life, so long of course that it is profitable. The working class however, do not want this kind of life. We do not need your “protection” (even if we were naïve enough to consider you sincere) and instead must wage a political battle to overthrow your governments and the class it represents. Imperialist interests took its troops to Iraq for plunder and profit, the plunder of Iraq – far from reducing or “fighting” terror has been its biggest recruitment drive. The world is in a far worse position, the tender situation in Britain is ultimately the result of the imperialist occupation of Iraq.

How then can we ask those who have caused the problem, to solve the problem when they refuse to tackle it at its very source? It is the metaphorical equivalent of a Man who, with a leak in his roof returns time after time to the carpet shop and keeps ripping up the old damp rugs and replacing them hoping it will get better. What is needed is to fix the leak, the leak is imperialism, and the only solution is the establishment of a planned socialist society which removes the profit drive and the need or reason to terrorise countries for specific economic benefits.

Personal Politics

2005-07-23T12:40:00.000-07:00

An appeal to the socialist movement

Political Independence

After about one year of contemplating and debating with myself, I have made the decision to become independent of all parties and organisations. This decision is being made due to my ongoing political development, combined with my views on the left in Britain and the future of the socialist movement here, and in countries with similar situations.

I do not expect this piece of writing to change anything, at least straight away anyway, I’d simply like to explain my experiences and feelings, and make an appeal to comrades in the movement about the future of socialists, their aims and their methods.

I became a member of Socialist Appeal, UK section of the International Marxist Tendency when I was 16. This was largely due to my position on the Labour Party and the fact that I was strongly opposed to the building of “new parties” and the illusion that they could become mass parties of the working class.

To the credit of Socialist Appeal my theoretical development has been excellent, something the tendency as a whole puts in high regard. Although differences have surfaced between myself and the organisation this is not the factor behind me choosing to leave. I still have a very sympathetic outlook towards the ideas of the group, and will continue to read much of its material as I have done in the past. As far as the building of the organisation or any other organisation goes however, I will play no further part.

Parties

I was horrified at the scenes I witnessed at this years G8 alternatives event in Edinburgh where at least 20 different groups and parties swarmed outside like vultures waving their publications in the faces of what little “new blood” their might have been present. This might look “perfectly normal” for older and experienced comrades (perhaps I could put myself in this category nowadays?) but imagine you are a 14/15 year old attending an event like this for the first time, what are your first impressions of a movement that is supposed to be about class unity?

I have no illusions that socialists can just make a call for “unity” and everyone will fall in line as one. Our movement is far too polluted and corrupt to achieve anything near this at the moment. For the time being I have to accept that this mass of groups and parties exist, and will continue to exist, and with each one proclaiming theirself The Revolutionary Party young people will continue to join them, and to an extent to build them.

I cannot deny that the role of a revolutionary party is important in socialism. But the question is, where will this revolutionary party arise? And what role can a party or group play in this current period of non-revolutionary politics in Britain and similar countries?

Young, and new comrades who are recruited by parties and groups at demonstrations, meetings or high street stalls are able to develop their politics to an extent, but this comes with the instant burden of recruitment drives, selling the paper and other such added pressures.

As a comrade of an organisation you are taught (perhaps not in so many words) that your primary loyalty is to building the party. I think we have here the starting point of our problem. The movement, particularly its smaller groups, is placing much emphasis on theory such as dialectics and scientific socialism which produces well educated comrades with an excellent understanding of these matters. On the other hand however, groups are placing much emphasis on the need to build their party, which can instantly lead to a young comrade viewing his/her fellow Marxists in separate groups (who share his/her views on the world, on dialectics and on socialism) as ‘the enemy’ or ‘a rival’ – someone who they are competing with to build their party and vice versa. This means that instead of uniting on their common ground, their ideology and theoretical understanding, they are divided by organisational name tags.

Instead of building a bridge between like minded progressive people who want to change society the party politics of socialism has erected colossal fences between it’s ground troops, and has thus become a pitiful rabble of small, divided, recruitment hungry parties which in it’s current form will destroy any hint of revolution that might arise on these shores at some point in the future.

What do I want?

Through the last few years of watching the socialist movement tie it’s shoelaces together and fall flat on it’s face, I have drawn the conclusion that complete class unity will not be achieved through any party, no matter how “broad based” or “open minded” that party is. I understand that certain parties will grow, and at time take leading roles, but they will not escape from the party mentality and will always be caught up in its petty struggles and distractions.

Comrades of all parties and groups must understand that their primary loyalty is not to their organisation, or to any other individuals, but to their movement – the socialist movement, and that the task of winning over new people to the ideas of socialism is paramount to recruiting people to parties to take up arms for a lifetime future of party warfare, fought against the very people they want to unite.

I’m not going to promote the utopian idea that I’d like to see everyone simply lay down the recruitment sheets and make love (chance would be a fine thing). Instead I’d like to see individuals of all groups beginning to ask themselves where they think the movement is heading and (above even the barriers of their party) what are their ideas and suggestions to begin the gigantic task of setting it on the right course.

If organisational labels are blanked out for one moment socialists would realise that their comrades are not simply those in their party branch, or their organisations party branches around the country – we have hundreds of thousands of comrades who think like us, who have the same desires and goals as us and want to change society. If we can begin to unite on this basis, through collaboration in progressive local, national or international campaigns, through broad based socialist discussion groups, or social events, or video screenings then we might, just might be on the right tracks for undoing years of self destructing and in fighting.

It is my view as a Marxist that there will be a role to play for a revolutionary party in a period of revolutionary upheaval, although this cannot nearly resemble the period we find ourselves in today. If progressive people can learn to work together, and debate their minor differences without waging slanderous wars against eachother today then the task of coming together as a revolutionary body in a period of revolution will come naturally to us.

I would not have the arrogance to ask anyone to leave their group and become an ‘independent’ like I have done. By all means people should stay, educate themselves and help to educate others. What I will ask is that comrades of all ages and backgrounds consider their own attitudes and aims, and try to see the movement as something which is not controlled from within any single party, our movement is much bigger and much more important than that, and it’s about time we were prepared to prove it.

My future

Without the burden of an organisational label I can now concentrate on working with the groups and individuals I consider progressive, without the need to recruit and to sell papers I am hopeful that this work will prove to be far more enjoyable and rewarding than it has been in the past.

In the future I hope to work alongside the Labour left, the revolutionary section of the SSP, and the excellent SSY youth group to build the socialist movement. I will of course be “joining” none of the above, but instead will be prepared to work alongside all.

I remain fully behind the excellent Hands off Venezuela campaign and will continue to raise the profile of the Bolivarian revolution whenever possible. I also declare my support for the Pakistan Trade Union Defence campaign, and again will be prepared to raise this banner through my own work in the movement.

I hope all comrades will view this piece in the light that I am not “leaving” anything, but “joining” everything, or more importantly everyone. I am not a solely a Trotskyist, a Stalinists, a Maoist, perhaps arguably not even a Marxist. I am a revolutionary socialist and I embrace all the elements of these ideologies that I personally agree with. With my own ideas and my own thoughts I will fight alongside comrades of all backgrounds for the destruction of the capitalist system and the transformation of society towards a socialist system, in Britain, in Europe and Worldwide.

Comradely regards,

A Socialist.

Human Rights in a Capitalist Society

2005-07-18T14:16:00.000-07:00

The free market cannot provide the barest necessities of life

In this age of wonderful technology and its unlimited possibilities we could be forgiven for thinking, at a glance, that humanity has reached its full potential with the development of such advancements in all fields of life making the world a better place for all its inhabitants.

This should be true, there is no question of that, but sadly such a thought is very far from the truth. In fact, in todays society, in every country on this Earth governments are not even capable of providing even the basic Human Rights principles adopted in 1948 as the “Universal Declaration of Human Rights”

To run through the entire declaration and point out examples on every sentence where these rights are not put into practice would be possible to the point that I’d probably find myself unable to type for such a length of time. Instead I’d just like to bring to your attention the most basic demonstrations of Human Rights failures under capitalism and its ‘free market’. That is the problem of wage labour, employment and unemployment and all the problems that flow from it.

Article 23 – Section 1 states that “Everyone has the right to work, to free choice of employment, to just and favourable conditions of work and to protection against unemployment.”

Even in the most “civilized” and advanced capitalist countries we can see a glaring failure of this extremely basic Human Right.

You may have a “right to work” – but can only do is if someone will employ you (something can be extremely difficult to find). The ‘Free Market’ means that it is largely left to private companies to employ people, as private companies are primarily operated to generate profit they will aim to do so by employing as few workers as possible that would be still humanly capable of getting the work done. As a result we have on the one hand, work forces working long hours with large workloads and on the other hand an unemployed section of society who are willing and able to work and cannot.

This is illogical, if you are a rational person you will naturally look for a rational solution to this problem, if we then propose a system of workers control and planning we are told that this is not rational, it is “utopian” – in fact the only utopian idea would be to think that we could repair this huge problem without tackling the very system that causes it, that is capitalism.

Even in the early stages of a workers state we would have the ability to abolish unemployment through controlling the factors that determine it. As opposed to a private company producing large amounts of wealth for its bosses and shareholders to buy helicopters, cruise ships and large houses in the Caribbean our workers controlled state companies can use its surpluss value to improve the wages of the current employees whilst also bringing in as many more workers as is necessary to lighten the overall workload. Furthermore this would drastically cut working hours giving us more free time to enjoy our lives outside of the workplace. This is by no means the final aim of socialism, but it would be a massive step towards it and would improve the lives of all working people 100%.

The only way to have genuine Human Rights is to do away with the money driven system of capitalism which puts profit before people and replace it with a system of socialist planning controlled and owned by the working class – not to create wealth for a minority of employers but to create a world that we can enjoy and live in peace without want or poverty. Socialism is essential to the future of Mankind and we must start preparing for it Today.

Relevant Links

The joys of Unemployment

Political Influences - Karl Marx

2005-07-17T02:32:00.000-07:00

"...no credit is due to me for discovering the existence of classes in modern society, nor yet the struggle between them. Long before me bourgeois historians had described the historical development of this struggle of the classes, and bourgeois economists the economic anatomy of the classes. What I did that was new was to prove: 1) that the existence of classes is only bound up with particular historical phases in the development of production; 2) that the class struggle necessarily leads to the dictatorship of the proletariat; 3) that this dictatorship itself only constitutes the transition to the abolition of all classes and to a classless society."

Karl Marx (1818-1883)

What can be said about Marx (aside from typical bourgeois slanders) that has not been said before? Marx, along with Frederick Engels played a decisive role in pulling socialism away from utopian and petty-bourgeois ideas and laying down the rock solid ideas of scientific socialism, advancing Hegel’s ‘dialectics’ (or turning them on their head, as Marx once said) and contributing a wealth of sound economic Marxian ideas that arm the movement to this very day.

His ideas have played a leading role in the revolutionary socialist movement for over 100 years, the claims of the bourgeois media that Marxism is “outdated” or even “dead” were recently dismissed when Karl Marx finished first place in a BBC poll to find the greatest philosopher of all time. Naturally there was much confusion from the defenders of capitalism over this ‘shock’ result, and all sorts of excuses have been thrown around to justify it. The hard fact remains that Marxism is still very much relevant today and will only become stronger in the turbulent periods ahead. Even those who proclaim Marxism to be “dead” cannot truly believe this, after all if something is dead why would they waste so much time and effort trying to prove it?

A fantastic writer, philosopher and activist, the life and ideas of Karl Marx are just as, if not more important now than they ever have been.

Relevant Links

Marx Internet Archive

Karl Marx voted most revered philosopher on BBC web site

Who are the real terrorists in Iraq?

2005-07-11T15:12:00.000-07:00

The Iraqi resistance

After the recent horrific terrorist attacks in London, which must be condemned by socialists as an attack on innocent working class people, a new wave of patriotic “anti-terrorism” propaganda has been plastered in front of the people of Britain in a bid to divert attention away from the real cause of the problem. Blair and his clique had no doubt been reminded of the fate of the Spanish government after the Madrid bombings, though the general election has now passed and with the complete lack of an alternative party available the thought that they might have suffered the same fate could be considered far fetched. He was however taking no chances, and the media owned by the class represented by Blair and his people – the capitalist class, have served up a powerful smokescreen to protect those who effectively caused this attack from having any blame directed at them whatsoever.

We should be reminded however, that the terrorist attacks on working people – although previously unthinkable in this country are a common occurrence for many people in areas such as the Middle East – namely Iraq. But who is largely responsible for these attacks? Is it the “fundamentalists” and “insurgents” so often mentioned in our newspapers and mass media, or could we speak the unspeakable and propose that the main terrorist organisations in Iraq come in the form of the imperialist armies who occupy it’s towns and cities to serve the needs of it’s corrupt business fuelled governments and leaders.

Victims of terrorism in Iraq

Although the same mistake cannot be made as is acceptable in the bourgeois media – which would be to claim that “all imperialist troops are terrorists” we must recognise the role of the occupying forces in Iraq as reactionary forces. Sympathies must go to the young Men and Women who have, through poor social conditions and lack of opportunities at home, combined with a barrage of propaganda, lies and broken promises, signed up for the imperialist armies in an attempt to “do something” with their lives. Indeed every soldier killed in Iraq is mourned in the largely working class areas of their homes in Britain and America. On a much larger scale however we see the slaughter of thousands of innocent workers and peasants in Iraq who’s only crime has been to live and work in an area of specific economic interest to imperialist powers. This is a crime of humanity, the devastation and death in Iraq is on a level that we in Britain cannot contemplate, even after the barbaric attacks of the 7th July.

More victims

Can we then have the arrogance to condemn those who have taken up arms against the occupiers - in light of a clear anti-imperialist organisation being provided by any Iraqi “communist” organisation, as “terrorists” and “fundamentalists” when a large majority of these people are fighting back because their lives as they new it, along with their families and friends have been burned and crushed under the rubble of bombs dropped to “liberate” them?

Iraqi children welcome their “liberators”

There are rogue elements of this resistance (the sect of Abu Musab al-Zarqawi for example), naturally it is these elements that will be used as a figurehead for the entire movement in the bourgeois media, but on a whole groups like these are a drop in the ocean in a country which is terrorised by the large numbers of amphetamine fuelled thugs and rednecks who have been let loose in Iraq with little or no discipline from their officers and “leaders”.

The pictures from Iraq that can be obtained through alternative news services are pictures that our government would rather we did not see. The carnage of the aftermath of the attacks in London have filled the news broadcasts and newspapers since the day they were carried out, and rightly so, people are angry and upset, they demand answers and they want to see those responsible brought to justice. But why can we only see one side of the story?

The innocent civilians of Iraq want justice, there is no difference between a grieving mother, spouse or child of an Iraqi civilian than a British civilian. So how then can we accuse those who are taking the only revenge they are humanly capable of doing at this point in time as “terrorists” – this reeks of hypocrisy when in reality if you yourself were put in the position of seeing your home destroyed along with the murder of close friends and family the question would be hammered home to you as it has been for so many people living under the cosh of imperialist occupation – “what would you do?”

"What would you do?"

Socialism - "a good idea in theory"

2005-06-27T08:46:00.000-07:00

Socialism "failed in the USSR"?

In October of 1917 the Bolsheviks led a workers revolution on the slogan “peace, land and bread”. If the conditions before were even barely tolerable how would it have been possible to gain so much support with such simplistic and basic demands?

The Soviet Union was a newly born workers state in which the small working class and largely illiterate peasantry began to build the foundations of a communist society on top of all the old degenerated rubbish of the feudal society they had just defeated. This alone would never be easy, and it is not possible to completely build socialism in one country alone, although conditions did improve greatly after the October revolution compared with the miserable existence of life under the Tsar and latterly the provincial government.

What problems did the USSR face on top of this? The invasion of over twenty armies from imperialist countries, combined with a civil war. On top of this there were the first of many defeats for the German revolution and of course the defeat of other revolutions in Europe.

This evidence does not point to the simple fact that “communism had it’s chance and failed”, the conditions at that time were not in favour of the USSR, in fact they were at colossal odds against it.

The rise of Stalinism was not the rise of a “bad man” but the rise of a new bureaucracy that had formed within the isolated workers state. The difference between Stalinism and Bolshevism was at first the abandonment of the need for international socialism and to work as an international organisation. This policy could only have worsened the isolation of the USSR, and it did. It was also Stalin’s policy of “social fascism” against the Social Democrats in Germany that split the workers down the middle, with the KPD claiming that Social Democrats were “just as bad as fascists” – this tactic ultimately not only defeated the German revolution once and for all, whilst in turn sealing the death warrant of the USSR – it also allowed a man called Adolf Hitler to come to power “without breaking a window” as he later boasted.

It’s true that Marx had really expected a revolution to break out first in an advanced capitalist country, although as Lenin said “capitalism broke at its weakest link” in Russia. Some people argue that it was a mistake to take power before capitalism had evolved, this argument has no bearings to real life however, revolutions don’t happen because of theory, they happen for a reason. Successful socialist revolutions elsewhere (Germany) would have assured the future of the USSR and prevented it from isolation, unfortunately the German revolution was eventually defeated, this was a huge blow, arguably a fatal one, to the revolution.

It is not socialism that has failed, but capitalism

There are some very rich people who have a fantastic lifestyle under capitalism, there are also many poor people who have a terrible wretched lifestyle under capitalism. In the UK, and generally the West, capitalism has been able to grow to its maximum potential and it still fails to provide even the basic requirements for a good lifestyle to many. Socialism has not existed as such, and so the comparison is not a fair one, although the benefits of a nationalised planned economy have been there for all to see.

The conditions to build communism have never really been ripe until the last few decades, there is also the fact that anywhere it has emerged in an embryonic form it has never yet been an advanced capitalist country with a strong and organised proletariat.

We have seen some fantastic examples of workers control and it’s colossal benefits in recent years, and bearing in mind these are only single factories mostly, multiply the benefits by a thousand and you will get the indication of the capabilities of a healthy workers state – something we might well see established in Venezuela before the year is out.

It will be the first step to socialism that is vital, so long as the communist movement bases itself on an internationalist programme and makes the benefits of a planned and commonly owned society fully known to the workers of capitalist countries worldwide (backed up by real living evidence) then I think it is not only fair to say that communism is possible - it’s an essential step towards the liberation of mankind.

When the working class moves to establish a socialist society it will be opposed by a minority of people who benefit from a capitalist society through living off the surplus value of those who work.

There is no issue here with “not liking” people. Our aim is to overthrow a system that creates class divisions, contradicting interests, poverty and inevitably war. Though the working classes will build a communist society it is also the liquidation of the class system and classes, so we are talking about benefiting society as a whole in the long run. Once capitalism no longer exists you cannot have a capitalist class.

I would encourage all thinking people to study and discuss socialist ideas, it’s quite rare to find people that are happy with the current world situation, surely the next point would be building a movement that’s capable of changing it.

My references to Latin America are mainly to highlight the importance of the situation where more and more areas are coming under the control of workers and peasants. The US has so far been unable to halt this trend (not through lack of trying) although they will naturally step up their efforts as the situation becomes more dangerous to their system, although the more aggression they will use will also endanger their system so it’s not really something that imperialism can benefit from either way.

I don’t think we’ll ever see the perfect conditions for socialism, I don’t think we’ll ever see ‘pure’ revolutions either. We can’t wait for things to happen far off in the future in my view, for communists the task is to fight for socialism in the movement at all times. Obviously we won’t see a revolution in Britain tomorrow, but that shouldn’t deter us from building a revolutionary movement in the meantime.

Guilty until proven innocent

I believe the very fact that no substantial or scientific evidence can be found to disprove communism is enough to prove that it is very much a workable system that is capable of liberating mankind.

I often get the impression though that communists are considered “guilty until proven innocent” though, we are asked to prove something without being confronted with any evidence to disprove it.To which we would reply that if you cannot find anything to disprove our idea then how can it not be considered (at least) a valid possibility?

I’ve heard and argued against the old “USSR collapsed” and “human nature” arguments for years, they are straw man arguments with no substance to them at all.If you have any new or groundbreaking theories that communism can’t work then I’d be happy to hear them and answer them as best I can.

Until then I suppose there is little more I can say on the matter.

Terrorism and "terrorism"

2005-06-27T08:24:00.000-07:00

"one man's terrorist is another man's freedom fighter"

A definition and notes on terrorism, courtesy of the Encyclopaedia of Marxism. I have posted this because I believe ‘terrorism’ is a word thrown around loosely by the ruling classes in an attempt to scare us and to up their excuses to prune our already diminishing basic freedoms.

The following should be read carefully and understood.

Terrorism

An aspect of psychological warfare whose aim is to instill fear and intimidation among both civilians and the military/police through the use of limited but concentrated violence. The basis of terrorist actions are a lack of popular support and the need to subjugate the popular will through destructive acts of violence causing widespread fear and terror.

Terrorism has historically been practiced by any class as a weapon in the class struggle. It is typically a reactionary use of force. While terrorism is commonly conducted by individuals or small groups, historical examples of terrorism can also be found in the Spanish Inquisition, and more recently in organizations like the U.S. Ku Klux Klan, and during the latter half of the 19th century terrorism was used by anarchist organizations claiming "propaganda of the deed".

Terrorism is a weapon that has been used by nearly all governments at various times against their opposing classes. Some of the best known examples of this in the 20th-century were Nazi Germany, the Soviet Union under Stalin, the United States during the McCarthy trials, etc. After this, imperialism predominantly exported terrorism to the underdeveloped nation's — U.S. tactics from Guatemala to Iraq, etc.

Terrorism is not necessarily violence against civilians, but if not it is then certainly meant to create psychological terror against civilians through violence against the government, police, military, structures, etc. Some terrorists target the government or the police, just as a guerilla would, but without *local* popular support. As an example, put a Black Panther in a white suburban community who acts exactly as he would in a minority community, and he would be a terrorist (The Black Panthers never did this, and they were not terrorists). The narodiniki were assasins, and believed that attacks on the government would show the masses that the government was bad; they were terrorists because the people loved the czar, and were terrified that something could happen to him. Castro was not a terrorist in his Moncada attack; there was not obvious support for a revolution in that there were no open revolutionary groups nor movements, but his attack expressed the will of the people -- he became an instant hero among Cuba's peasants. The issue of popular local support is thus fundamental to understanding the terrorist. Terrorist ideals may be popular in Afghanistan, for example, but when exported to the US, they are not popular, and when violence is employed, they become terror. A palestinian among his brother and sister civilians who defends herself against an invading Israeli solider is a guerilla, not a terrorist; while those who go into land occupied by Isreali's and carry out attacks against soldiers and/or civilians are terrorists, different only from an invading army as a result of a lack resources; e.g. having a conventional military.

"In our eyes, individual terror is inadmissible precisely because it belittles the role of the masses in their own consciousness, reconciles them to their powerlessness, and turns their eyes and hopes towards a great avenger and liberator who some day will come and accomplish his mission. The anarchist prophets of the 'propaganda of the deed' can argue all they want about the elevating and stimulating influence of terrorist acts on the masses. Theoretical considerations and political experience prove otherwise. The more 'effective' the terrorist acts, the greater their impact, the more they reduce the interest of the masses in self-organisation and self-education. But the smoke from the confusion clears away, the panic disappears, the successor of the murdered minister makes his appearance, life again settles into the old rut, the wheel of capitalist exploitation turns as before; only the police repression grows more savage and brazen. And as a result, in place of the kindled hopes and artificially aroused excitement comes disillusionment and apathy."

Leon Trotsky - Why Marxists oppose Individual Terrorism

Terrorist?

Governmental Use: In practice, governments have defined terrorism in many different ways to defend themselves with whatever means they deam necessary. After September 11, 2001, the U.S. government created a new definition for domestic terrorism.

Groups or individuals operating entirely inside the US, attempting to influence the US government or population to effect political or social change by engaging in criminal activity.

FBI Joint Terrorism Task Force PamphletOctober, 2002

Needless to say, this means everyone from Civil Rights activists to environmentalists, to anyone who engages in unlawful activity with the intent to influence others to think differently. This definition has little bearing on the history nor meaning of the practice of terrorism.

The introduction of "freedom" in the former USSR

2005-06-27T08:11:00.000-07:00

Some interesting facts

* According to the Institute of Social and Economic Research of Russian Academy of Sciences, Russia has 4 million homeless adults, 3 million beggars, about 5 million homeless children, 3 million prostitutes, about 1,5 million Russian women work as prostitutes in Europe and Asia. 6 million Russians are mentally ill, 5 million do drugs and more than 6 million are infected with AIDS. According to the Director of Fund for Children Alichanov, the number of orphans exceeded the figure of 1945 - 750 thousand versus 678 thousand after the meat grinder of Great Patriotic War.

* According to the World Health Organization, the number of alcoholics in Russia varies from 37 to 42 million people. Yearly consumption of spirits per person equals 14 litres (on average), while according to the international scale, consumption of more than 8 litres leads to physical degradation. Russia is 40th in the list of "Top Number of Theatres" and 47th in "Most Intelligent Youth".

* About 3 million people commit crimes and more than eighty thousand people are murdered every year (from the report of General Prosecutor of Russian Federation Ustinov). There are more than a million prisoners in jails that were designed for 700 thousand "inhabitants" (compare it with 820.881 prisoners in the whole Soviet Union of 1937). Modern Russia is a world leader in the number of prisoners per population (80-81 for every thousand).

* 200 thousand people get injured in car accidents every year; nearly 30 thousand of them die.

* Average lifespan in Russia is 64,8 years, while in USA it equals 75 and 71,3 in China. Even in semi-socialist Byelorussia, which is absolutely poor according to Russia's state-run television, average lifespan is five or even six years longer, while infant death rate in Russia is two times higher than in Belarus. Ten thousand abortions every year and seven million childless families conclude the picture of Russian demography.

* In XIX century, when Russian Empire included Poland, Baltics, Finland, parts of Moldavia and so on, it consisted of 69 districts, whilst nowadays the remains of what is left of it are divided into 89 parts. This is the explanation of the army of bureaucrats, whose number exceeds 1'100'000. During Stalin's rule there was only half a million of them and 532'000 of government officials under Khrushchev. According to Admiral Bardin, Russian Army now employs more officers than during Great Patriotic War, while the total number of soldiers has decreased five times since 1991.

* According to the former Prime Minister Kas'yanov, 40 billion dollars are taken out of the country every year. Population of Russia spends 33,5 billion dollars on bribes each year (Satarov, "Indem" Fund).

Direct action to achieve our goals?

2005-06-27T07:56:00.000-07:00

As a socialist activist, living today under the capitalist system in a non revolutionary situation, I could myself be considered a pacifist. I am in favour of peaceful non violent demonstrations, I have attended many in the past and will no doubt attend many in the future, I think that to cause trouble through acts of violence during these demonstrations can only seek to be used against us, to label us all troublemakers, and for the police to be given more power to “deal with us” during future demos.

There are groups who condone violence during demonstrations yes. I think it is fair to say that anyone who thinks that attacking the police or throwing a brick through a McDonald’s window can advance the cause of socialism has serious ideological problems.

In short, it is unlikely that many activists living Today in Scotland will have a gun poked in their face because of their beliefs, or will be forced to defend the lives of themselves, their friends, and their families because of the conditions around them. I’m not saying that these things have not/do not/will not happen, I’m just speaking in general.

The non-revolutionary situation that exists today in Scotland however, can not be compared to any revolution, particularly the Russian revolution, where terrible acts of violence and terrorism have been, and will be used, to suppress the uprising of the working class in an attempt to liberate themselves.

It is an insult to every fallen comrade, who has fought and died, to claim that he or she should not have attempted to defend themselves or their (our) movement. It is easy for us to sit here, in our houses, talking about what we would or would not do during a revolutionary situation, but I think we can all agree that things can be very much different in the “real world”.

How many of us could say that we could sit back and watch loved ones and those close to us, captured, tortured or even murdered. Would it be “violent” to defend ourselves against those who were attempting to carry out these actions? Is self defence “violent”, when the consequences of not defending yourselves would see far more violence take place?

What is “violence”, is the definition set in stone, or does it come down to personal opinion? Could an act of “violence” which is used to prevent a much larger act of “violence” be considered “non-violent”? And can we establish a definition of “non-violence” that could cover every possible situation imaginable? I think to try and limit ourselves to a crystal clear programme of non violence always and without question is naïve, utopian and dangerous in my opinion.

It has been argued that the kind of direct action, such as the protests in America during the Vietnam war, should be used to achieve our goals and prevent us from “having to revolt”.

The main fact is, the USA took one hell of a beating in Vietnam, the fact that they could not win the war, combined with the fact that most of the US soldiers refused to fight and the army was verging on mass mutiny were all factors here, along with the huge protests around the world. The point is, this war was stopped, but as capitalism and American imperialism was still around to operate they have since been involved in many “wars”.Since the end of the Vietnam war, here is a list of the countries bombed by the USA, NONE of these bombings have led to a "democratic" government even though this was more often than not the reason given for the aggression.

• Cambodia 1969-70
• Guatemala 1967-69
• Grenada 1983
• Lebanon 1984
• Libya 1986
• El Salvador 1980s
• Nicaragua 1980s
• Panama 1989
• Iraq 1991-99
• Sudan 1998
• Afghanistan 1998
• Yugoslavia 1999
• Afghanistan 2001
• Iraq 2003

My point is here, is it up to us to protest every time these criminal acts take place? or to actually take full economic and social control to prevent these profit and world domination driven massacres from happening in the first place?

We can’t trust imperialists with the future of the planet, they will destroy it.

Marxism and Trade Unionism in Pakistan

2005-06-23T13:37:00.000-07:00

As a Marxist and internationalist I regard the solidarity of organised workers groups from around the globe of highest importance. When our fellow workers are struggling we struggle with them, we need to know exactly what is going on, where, when and why. We need international appeals and campaigns to keep every progressive strike and dispute a matter for the international working class and ensure that no group of workers, however small, should feel isolated and weak in the fight against the tyrannical capitalist system.

I have been a supporter of the Pakistan Trade Union Defence campaign since it was founded. Since meeting comrade Manzoor Ahmed, Pakistani Marxist MP and PTUDC member in Edinburgh during a speaking tour I have always felt strongly about the cause of the campaign and I am constantly working to build solidarity in Scotland for our comrades in the Indian subcontinent.

I have provided a brief statement of the PTUDC with its positions and aims. I hope you will find this interesting and if you agree with them then help support and publicise the campaign in any way you are able.

What is the PTUDC? The PTUDC openly declares its views and aims in response to the need for working-class militancy and solidarity in Pakistan.

Our Positions:

On Child Labour
The dire situation of children in Pakistan deserves serious attention from workers everywhere.

On Privatisation
Putting profits before lives is unacceptable. For democratic workers' control of the economy!

On Women
Repression of women and the system that supports it must come to an end.

Our History:

Fighting Anti-Union Measures
A union is an indispensable organization for workers, and must be preserved.

Response to Assassination
Union leader Arif Shah's brutal assassination did not have the desired effect--the struggle continues.

Life of Struggle
Shahida Jabeen is one of the most persevering fighters for workers' power.

Not Defeated, Only Strengthened
An article on the rallies and demonstrations after Shah's assassination.

The PTUDC is a campaign organised by The Struggle – Pakistans largest and most influential Marxist organisation. Comrade Manzoor Ahmed, Pakistan Peoples Party MP and leading member of The Struggle was elected to parliament on the slogan “irreconcilable struggle till socialist revolution”. He remains a key figure in the labour and socialist movement in Pakistan not only in the fight against poverty pay and privatisation, but for the establishment of a new socialist society and a united Asia controlled and managed by the working class.

“irreconcilable struggle till socialist revolution”

Definitions of class and the class system

2005-06-21T12:51:00.000-07:00

The Encyclopaedia of Marxism offers excellent definitions on the class system and the major classes. I hope these links will prove useful for anyone who is researching, or curious about this important section of Marxist social analysis.

Class

Bourgeoisie

Middle Class

Petty-bourgeois

Working Class/ Proletariat

Lumpenproletariat

See also What’s happening to the working class?

What is a revolution?

2005-06-21T10:36:00.000-07:00

"Whoever expects to see a 'pure' social revolution will never live to see it. Such a person pays lip-service to revolution without understanding what revolution is". - Lenin

What is a revolution? This self-evident question is rarely asked. But unless we ask and answer it, we shall never be in a position to determine what is now happening in Venezuela – or anywhere else. A revolution, as Trotsky explains in the History of the Russian Revolution, is a situation where the masses begin to take their destiny into their own hands. This is certainly the case in Venezuela now. The awakening of the masses and their active participation in politics is the most decisive feature of the Venezuelan Revolution and the secret of its success.

In the same Preface, Leon Trotsky – who, after all, knew a few things about revolutions – answers in the following way:

"The most indubitable feature of a revolution is the direct interference of the masses in historical events. In ordinary times the state, be it monarchical or democratic, elevates itself above the nation, and history is made by specialists in that line of business - kings, ministers, bureaucrats, parliamentarians, journalists. But at those crucial moments when the old order becomes no longer endurable to the masses, they break over the barriers excluding them from the political arena, sweep aside their traditional representatives, and create by their own interference the initial groundwork for a new régime. Whether this is good or bad we leave to the judgement of moralists. We ourselves will take the facts as they are given by the objective course of development. The history of a revolution is for us first of all a history of the forcible entrance of the masses into the realm of rulership over their own destiny." (L. Trotsky, The History of the Russian Revolution)

In normal periods the masses do not participate in politics. The conditions of life under capitalism place insurmountable barriers in their way: the long hours of labour, physical and mental tiredness, etc. Normally, people are content to leave the decisions affecting their lives to someone else: the local councillor, the professional politicians, the trade union official etc.

However, at certain critical moments, the masses burst onto the scene of history, take their lives and destinies into their hands and become transformed from passive agents into the protagonists of the historical process. One would have to be particularly blind or obtuse not to see that this is precisely the situation that now exists in Venezuela. In recent years, but especially since the attempted coup of April 2002, millions of workers and peasants have been on the move, fighting to change society. If this is not a revolution, then we will never see one. Only the most woodenheaded sectarian could fail to understand this.

It is necessary to understand that the masses, whether in Venezuela or any other country, only learn gradually from their experience. The working class has to go through the experience of the revolution and the social crisis in order to distinguish between the different tendencies, programmes and leaders. It learns by a method of successive approximations. As Trotsky explains:

"The different stages of a revolutionary process, certified by a change of parties in which the more extreme always supersedes the less, express the growing pressure to the left of the masses — so long as the swing of the movement does not run into objective obstacles. When it does, there begins a reaction: disappointments of the different layers of the revolutionary class, growth of indifferentism, and therewith a strengthening of the position of the counterrevolutionary forces. Such, at least, is the general outline of the old revolutions."

And he adds:

"Only on the basis of a study of political processes in the masses themselves, can we understand the rôle of parties and leaders, whom we least of all are inclined to ignore. They constitute not an independent, but nevertheless a very important, element in the process. Without a guiding organisation, the energy of the masses would dissipate like steam not enclosed in a piston-box. But nevertheless what moves things is not the piston or the box, but the steam."

These remarks exactly fit the situation in Venezuela, where the movement of the masses from below constitutes the principal motor-force of the revolution. It is impossible to understand the process by confining oneself to an analysis of the leaders, their class origins, statements and programmes. This is really like the froth on the waves of the ocean, which are only a superficial reflection of the profound currents beneath the surface.

Socialist Screenings

2005-06-20T13:21:00.000-07:00

Films of significance to the socialists and labour movement.

Matewan

The true story of the struggles of militant trade unionism against the barbaric attacks of a large capitalist mining company. A fascinating, educational and inspiring film that has many lessons to be learned. One of the best films I have seen.

The Motorcycle Diaries

An extremely enjoyable and inspirational insight into the life of Ernesto ‘Che’ Guevara, who travelled with his friend Alberto Granado throughout the countries of Latin America, soaking in the experiences that would later mould him into a heroic revolutionary communist. Uncovers much of the mystery surrounding the visual icon you see on t-shirts and posters nowadays, to show that he was in fact just like the rest of us.

Political Influences - Vladimir Lenin

2005-06-19T10:10:00.000-07:00

"By introducing social in place of private ownership of the means of production and exchange, by introducing planned organization of social production to ensure the well-being of all the members of society, the proletarian social revolution will do away with the division of society into classes and thereby emancipate the whole of oppressed humanity, for it will put an end to all forms of exploitation of one section of society by another"

Vladimir Lenin (1870-1924)

Having become interested in the history of the Soviet Union, and of communism, at the age of 16, I purchased a book in Glasgow from a Mexican cartoonist and socialist named ‘Rius’ titled “Introducing Lenin”. At this point I had not grasped the concept of Marxism and my interest here was still at a purely curious stage. After reading the book (which was very good for beginners) I decided to attempt some of Lenin’s works themselves. I say ‘attempt’ because I had imagined them to be very out-dated and stuffy, however, after getting hold of a copy of “The State and Revolution” I realised how wrong I was.

This book, and in particular Chapter 5, had the ‘clicking’ effect on me (it all fell into place) and for the first time I understood that socialism was not simply ‘a good idea’ but a realistic and scientific goal which is vital to the liberation and the future of mankind.

I have since read many more of Lenin’s works, all consistently brilliant. Over 80 years after his death his ideas are still as relevant as ever, they are a beacon to be carried down from generation to generation. Lenin’s life and ideas are one of the many great branches of the tree of socialism, and so long as man is exploited by his fellow man they will continue to be a weapon of the oppressed against his oppressors.

Relevant Links

Lenin Internet Archive

Gandhi, an anti-working class cretin

2005-06-17T11:33:00.000-07:00

If we were to believe what we were taught in school then we could be forgiven for thinking that Gandhi, along with others such as mother Teresa, Pope John Paul II etc were “good people” who fought for the liberation of the poor. At a glance this might seem to be true, but in reality these “good people” were no more than servants and mouthpieces of the decaying and barbaric imperialist system that imprisons our planet and it’s inhabitants.

This entry on Gandhi is not meant to be a complete history of Congress or his way of thinking, just a few examples to show that the real aim of Gandhi was to achieve independence by "civilised" means, while maintaining the rule of capitalists and landlords in India and avoid any action which might spur the revolutionary aims of workers and peasants.

Gandhi on private ownership: " I will never be a participant in snatching away of the properties from their owners and you should know that I will use all my influence and authority against class war. If somebody wants to deprive you from your property you will find me standing shoulder to shoulder with you" taken from Partition can it be undone? by Lal Khan page 52.

Also this "great" pacifist was actually a big hypocrite on the question of the army. When a group of soldiers refused to fire on an anti-imperialist demonstration Gandhi condemned it and said:

"When a soldier refuses to fire then he is guilty of betraying his oath (!). I can never advise soldiers to defy the orders of officers because, if tomorrow I form a government, I will have to use the same soldiers and officers. If today I advise them for any defiance then tomorrow they can also refuse to obey my orders" Ibid page 52.

If any of you are interested in reading about how the Indian bourgeoisie let their interests lead to massmurder on people and the partition of India into India and Pakistan you should read 'Partition. Can it be undone?' By Lal Khan. It is availible from the Wellred Bookshop

Gandhi and his strategy of civil disobedience were clearly aimed at containing the revolutionary anti-imperialist character of the struggle of Indian workers and peasants, and this was clearly shown at every juncture of the movement for national independence. He went as far as to call off any civil disobedience when the movement threatened to adopt a mass character and move beyond the limits of peaceful petioning into revolutionary action.

Some examples: - Gandhi started his activities in South Africa where he fought for political rights only for Indians (not for Blacks who were the majority opf the population), in fact he voluntarily recruited Indians for a support company for the colonial army in 1906 during the great Zulu uprising (despite the fact that at that time Indians had no rights at all).

- during World War One, already in India, he tried to recruit a corps of Indians to fight for the British Empire, but he did not have much success since people asked themselves why should they fight for the empire that was slaving them!

- in 1916 he "mediated" in a strike of mill workers in Ahmehabad, in which he insisted that the workers should NOT picket the premises and should settle for a 35% wage increase faced with a 60% prices increase! By the end of the whole experience the workers were bitterly angry at Gandhi "for being a friend of the millowners, riding in their motor-cars and eating sumptuously with them, while the weavers were starving".

- the first part of the disobedience campaign in India was in the 1919. A central theme of the agitation in that period was the passing of the Rowlette act which basically extended the denial of democratic rights which had been established with the excuse of world war one (Congress had loyaly supported Britain in WW1) This aroused millions of workers and peasants into mass action and there were virtual insurrections in several provinces. Congress and Gandhi first accepted the Rowlette act, but when the movement became too big, then they joined it and tried to control it under the slogans of non-violence. The idea was that the middle class would take the leadership of the movement while the masses should limit themselves to hand-spinning cotton.

- a 1919 resolution of the Congress reads: "This Congress, while fully recognising the grave provocation that led to a sudden outburst of mob frenzy, deeply regrets and condemns the excesses committed in certain parts of the Punjab and Gujarat resulting in the loss of lives and injury to person and property during the month of April last." This was after the British had killed at least 1,200 people in Punjab (where only 4 British had died in the incidents) and after the famous Amritsar incident where the British fired on an unarmed crowd in an enclosed square killing at least 400!! And Congress regreted "mob frenzy"!!!

- When the movement was reaching its peak and the British feared social revolution (that is the overthrow not only of British rule but also of landlordism and capitalism), Gandhi called off the campaign. The excuse used was the Chauri Chaura incident when groups of peasants faced with attacks on the part of the police ended up burning down a police station killing a number of police officers. "non-violence and non-cooperation" were abandoned in favour of the "constructive programme" which consisted in Congress workers going to the villages to preach traditional methods of production. 172 Chauri Chaura villagers were sentenced to death and there was no protest or campaign on the part of Congress leaders.

- the suspension of the mass movement was accompanied by a call to peasants to resume payment of taxes and other levies to the landlords! In fact in the resolution suspending the campaign there were three out of seven clauses relating to the payment of rents to the landlords by small peasants.

- the second wave of the campaign started in 1930. From the beginning the campaign was to be limited to Gandhi and a few chosen followers in what was known as the Slat March. The masses were asked to be patient and follow with the contructive programme. Again when the movement became too revolutionary Gandhi called it off in 1931 and signed the treacherous Gandhi-Irwin Pact

- in 1937-39 Congress Ministers took office in seven of the 11 provinces in India. They carried out a pro-capitalist pro-landlord policy, to the point of using armed force to supress workers and peasants' struggle. Thus the Bombay general strike was put down by the police and the army sent in by a Congress Minister. So much for non-violence!

To sum up with the words of Leon Trotsky "We must expose the treacheries and deceptions of Ghandism in front of the colonial peoples. The main aim of Ghandism is to water down the burning revolutionary fires amongst the people and to continue their exploitation for the petty interests of the national bourgeoisie"

Remarks of Revolution

2005-06-16T10:59:00.000-07:00

Some of my favourite revolutionary quotes.

Fidel Castro

"The revolution is a dictatorship of the exploited against the exploiters."

"If there ever was in the history of humanity an enemy who was truly universal, an enemy whose acts and moves trouble the entire world, threaten the entire world, attack the entire world in any way or another, that real and really universal enemy is precisely Yankee imperialism."

Hugo Chavez

“some people say that we cannot say nor do anything that can irritate those in Washington. Let’s be free without caring about what anyone else says.”

“if any member-government of the OAS should be monitored, it’s the government of the United States. A government that supports terrorists, invades countries, that tramples its own people, that is trying to impose a global dictatorship, is the government that should be monitored for human rights violations.”

"I have said it already, I am convinced that the way to build a new and better world is not capitalism. Capitalism leads us straight to hell"

“Everyday I become more convinced, there is no doubt in my mind, and as many intellectuals have said, that it is necessary to transcend capitalism. But capitalism can’t be transcended from within capitalism itself, but through socialism, true socialism, with equality and justice. But I’m also convinced that it is possible to do it under democracy, but not in the type of democracy being imposed from Washington,”

“Capitalism wants to annihilate the workers... here we are carrying out a process of liberation of the workers, and this is why they are annoyed in Washington”

James Connolly

"The great only appear great because we are on our knees - let us rise"

"Revolution is never practical - until the hour of revolution strikes. Then it alone is practical, and all the efforts of the conservatives and compromisers become the most visionary and futile of human imaginings. For that hour let us work, think and hope. For that hour let us pawn our present ease in hopes of a glorious redemption: For that hour let us prepare the hosts of labour with intelligence sufficient to laugh at the nostrums dubbed practical by our slave-lords - practical for the perpetuation of our slavery: For the supreme crisis of human history let us watch like sentinels with weapons ever at the ready."

"Without the power of the Industrial Union behind it, Democracy can only enter the State as the victim enters the gullet of the Serpent."

"If you strike at, imprison, or kill us, out of our prisons or graves we will still evoke a spirit that will thwart you, and perhaps, raise a force that will destroy you! We defy you! Do your worst!"

Tommy Douglas

"Man can now fly in the air like a bird, swim under the ocean like a fish, he can burrow into the ground like a mole. Now if only he could walk the earth like a man, this would be paradise."

Frederick Engels

“... it is our interest and our task to make the revolution permanent, until all more or less possessing classes have been forced out of their position of dominance, until the proletariat has conquered state power, and the association of proletarians, not only in one country but in all the dominant countries of the world, has advanced so far that competition among the proletarians of these countries has ceased and that at least the decisive productive forces are concentrated in the hands of the proletarians. For us the issue cannot be the alteration of private property but only its annihilation, not the smoothing over of class antagonisms but the abolition of classes, not the improvement of existing society but the foundation of a new one.”

“A revolution is certainly the most authoritarian thing there is; it is the act whereby one part of the population imposes its will upon the other part by means of rifles, bayonets and cannon — authoritarian means, if such there be at all; and if the victorious party does not want to have fought in vain, it must maintain this rule by means of the terror which its arms inspire in the reactionists. Would the Paris Commune have lasted a single day if it had not made use of this authority of the armed people against the bourgeois? Should we not, on the contrary, reproach it for not having used it freely enough? ”

Ludwig Feuerbach

"My only wish is…to transform friends of God into friends of man, believers into thinkers, devotees of prayer into devotees of work, candidates for the hereafter into students of the world, Christians who, by their own procession and admission, are "half animal, half angel" into persons, into whole persons."

Ted Grant

"Nothing could move without the workers' permission. The Councils organised picketing, communications, permits, and even workers' defence corps in certain areas. At Methil, in Fife, for instance, in response to police attacks, the Council of Action organised a defence corps, which swelled to 700 volunteers and was organised into companies under the command of former NCOs. The corps was armed with pick shafts, which served to keep the forces of the state at bay. The ordinary functions of the capitalist state were paralysed. These Councils of Action were, in reality, embryos of workers' power. As the strike turned into a struggle with the government, the working class spontaneously developed its own organs of self-government."

Ernesto Guevara

"Many will call me an adventurer - and that I am, only one of a different sort: one of those who risks his skin to prove his platitudes."

"Hatred is an element of struggle; relentless hatred of the enemy that impels us over and beyond the natural limitations of man and transforms us into effective, violent, selective, and cold killing machines. Our soldiers must be thus; a people without hatred cannot vanquish a brutal enemy."

"Why does the guerrilla fighter fight? We must come to the inevitable conclusion that the guerrilla fighter is a social reformer, that he takes up arms responding to the angry protest of the people against their oppressors, and that he fights in order to change the social system that keeps all his unarmed brothers in ignominy and misery."

"Whenever death may surprise us, let it be welcome if our battle cry has reached even one receptive ear and another hand reaches out to take up our arms."

"If you tremble indignation at every injustice then you are a comrade of mine."

"We must carry the war into every corner the enemy happens to carry it: to his home, to his centers of entertainment; a total war. It is necessary to prevent him from having a moment of peace, a quiet moment outside his barracks or even inside; we must attack him wherever he may be, make him feel like a cornered beast wherever he may move."

"There is no other definition of socialism valid for us than that of the abolition of the exploitation of man by man."

Georg Wilhelm Friedrich Hegel

"It has been said that there are no sudden leaps in nature, and it is a common notion that things have their origin through gradual increase or decrease. But there is also such a thing as sudden transformation from quantity to quality. For example, water does not become gradually hard on cooling, becoming first pulpy and ultimately attaining a rigidity of ice, but turns hard at once. If temperature be lowered to a certain degree, the water is suddenly changed into ice, i.e., the quantity - the number of degrees of temperature - is transformed into quality - a change in the nature of the thing."

Heraclitus

"The world was created by none of the gods or men, but was, is, and will be eternally living fire, regularly becoming ignited and regularly becoming extinguished"

"No man ever steps in the same river twice, for it's not the same river and he's not the same man."

Vladimir Lenin

"We are marching in a compact group along a precipitous and difficult path, firmly holding each other by the hand. We are surrounded on all sides by enemies, and we have to advance almost constantly under their fire. We have combined, by a freely adopted decision, for the purpose of fighting the enemy, and not of retreating into the nearby marsh, the inhabitants of which, from the very outset, have reproached us with having chosen the path of struggle instead of the path of conciliation."

"World history is leading unswervingly towards the dictatorship of the proletariat, but is doing so by paths that are anything but smooth, simple and straight. "

"You have read and heard that communist theory—the science of communism created in the main by Marx, this doctrine of Marxism—has ceased to be the work of a single socialist of the nineteenth century, even though he was a genius, and that it has become the doctrine of millions and tens of millions of proletarians all over the world, who are applying it in their struggle against capitalism."

"With the clarity and brilliance of genius, this work outlines the new world outlook - consistent materialism, which also embraces the realm of social life, dialectics, as the most comprehensive and profound doctrine of development, the theory of the class struggle and of the world-historic revolutionary role of the proletariat, the creator of a new, communist society."

“Bourgeois nationalism and proletarian internationalism are two implacably opposed slogans, corresponding to two great class camps throughout the entire capitalist world and expressing two policies (rather, two world outlooks) on the national question.”

"The working class, which is the principle supplier of soldiers, and which bears the brunt of the material sacrifices, is in particular the natural enemy of wars, because wars contradict the aim it pursues, namely, the creation of an economic system founded on socialist principles, which in practice will give effect to the solidarity of peoples..."

"What is now happening to Marx's doctrine has, in the course of history, often happened to the doctrines of other revolutionary thinkers and leaders of oppressed classes struggling for emancipation. During the lifetime of great revolutionaries, the oppressing classes have visited relentless persecution on them and received their teaching with the most savage hostility, the most furious hatred, the most ruthless campaign of lies and slanders. After their death, attempts are made to turn them into harmless icons, canonise them, and surround their names with a certain halo for the "consolation" of the oppressed classes and with the object of duping them, while at the same time emasculating and vlugarising the real essence of their revolutionary theories and blunting their revolutionary edge. "

"Every class struggle is a political struggle... the working-class movement only then grows out of its embryonic state, its infancy, and becomes a class movement when it makes the transition to the political struggle."

"By introducing social in place of private ownership of the means of production and exchange, by introducing planned organization of social production to ensure the well-being of all the members of society, the proletarian social revolution will do away with the division of society into classes and thereby emancipate the whole of oppressed humanity, for it will put an end to all forms of exploitation of one section of society by another"

“We ourselves, the workers, will organize large-scale production on the basis of what capitalism has already created, relying on our own experience as workers, establishing the strictest, iron discipline supported by the state power of the armed workers; we will reduce the role of the state officials to that of simply carrying out our instruction as responsible, revocable, modestly paid "foreman and bookkeepers.”

Karl Liebknecht

"The basic law of capitalism is you or I, not both you and I"

"At the crash of economic collapse of which the rumblings can already be heard, the sleeping soldiers of the proletariat will awake as at the fanfare of the Last Judgment and the corpses of the victims of the struggle will arise and demand an accounting from those who are loaded down with curses."

“The youth are the flame of the proletarian revolution”

Rosa Luxemburg

"Freedom is always and exclusively freedom for the one who thinks differently"

John MacLean

Karl Marx

"Since the situation of the workers of all countries is the same, their interests the same, and their enemies the same, they must also fight together and confront the fraternity of the bourgeoisie of all nations with a fraternity of the workers of all nations."

"Catch a man a fish, and you can sell it to him. Teach a man to fish, and you ruin a wonderful business opportunity."

"Religion is the sigh of the oppressed creature, the heart of a heartless world, and the soul of soulless conditions. It is the opium of the people."

"In bourgeois society capital is independent and has individuality, while the living person is dependent and has no individuality."

"Men make their own history, but they do not make it just as they please; they do not make it under circumstances chosen by themselves, but under circumstances directly found, given and transmitted from the past. The tradition of all the dead generations weighs like a nightmare on the brain of the living."

"...no credit is due to me for discovering the existence of classes in modern society, nor yet the struggle between them. Long before me bourgeois historians had described the historical development of this struggle of the classes, and bourgeois economists the economic anatomy of the classes. What I did that was new was to prove: 1) that the existence of classes is only bound up with particular historical phases in the development of production; 2) that the class struggle necessarily leads to the dictatorship of the proletariat; 3) that this dictatorship itself only constitutes the transition to the abolition of all classes and to a classless society."

"The communist revolution is the most radical rupture with traditional property relations; no wonder that its development involves the most radical rupture with traditional ideas."

"The division of labor inside a nation leads at first to the separation of industrial and commercial from agricultural labor, and hence to the separation of town and country and to the open conflict of their interests."

"Since it is not for us to create a plan for the future that will hold for all time, all the more surely, what we contemporaries have to do is the uncompromising critical evaluation of all that exists, uncompromising in the sense that our criticism fears neither its own results nor the conflict with the powers that be."

"The workers have discovered that the union is the only way for them to withstand the overpowering pressure of capital."

“Labour is the source of all wealth, the political economists assert. And it really is the source — next to nature, which supplies it with the material that it converts into wealth. But it is even infinitely more than this. It is the prime basic condition for all human existence, and this to such an extent that, in a sense, we have to say that labour created man himself.”

Phil Mitchinson

"Of course! Who does not want peace? But the question is: how do we get it? How is a genuine and lasting peace to be achieved? The only way to get peace is by dealing with the real problems facing the people in their everyday lives."

Joseph Stalin

“Ideas are more powerful than guns. We would not let our enemies have guns, why should we let them have ideas.”

“The Pope? How many divisions has he got?”

“When we hang the capitalists they will sell us the rope we use.”

“Death solves all problems - no man, no problem.”

Leon Trotsky

“Where force is necessary, there it must be applied boldly, decisively and completely. But one must know the limitations of force; one must know when to blend force with a maneuver, a blow with an agreement.”

"Revolution is impossible until it becomes inevitable."

"A slave-owner who through cunning and violence shackles a slave in chains, and a slave who through cunning or violence breaks the chains—let not the contemptible eunuchs tell us that they are equals before a court of morality!"

"Without a guiding organization the energy of the masses would dissipate like steam in a piston-box. But nevertheless what moves things is not the piston or the box, but the steam."

“The end may justify the means as long as there is something that justifies the end.”

“If we oppose terrorist acts, it is only because individual revenge does not satisfy us. The account we have to settle with the capitalist system is too great to be presented to some functionary called a minister”

"The man who repudiates terrorism in principle—i.e., repudiates measures of suppression and intimidation towards determined and armed counter-revolution, must reject all idea of the political supremacy of the working class and its revolutionary dictatorship. The man who repudiates the dictatorship of the proletariat repudiates the Socialist revolution, and digs the grave of Socialism."

"Fighting fascism is nine tenths political education, one tenth equating their heads with the pavement"

"It is necessary to help the masses in the process of the daily struggle to find the bridge between present demands and the socialist program of the revolution. This bridge should include a system of transitional demands, stemming from today's conditions and from today's consciousness of wide layers of the working class and unalterably leading to one final conclusion: the conquest of power by the proletariat"

Mao Tse-Tung

“We think too small, like the frog at the bottom of the well. He thinks the sky is only as big as the top of the well. If he surfaced, he would have an entirely different view.”

“Communism is not love. Communism is a hammer which we use to crush the enemy.”

“Despise the enemy strategically, but take him seriously tactically.”

“Revolution is not a dinner party, not an essay, nor a painting, nor a piece of embroidery; it cannot be advanced softly, gradually, carefully, considerately, respectfully, politely, plainly and modestly.”

Alan Woods

"Whereas revolutionary Marxism represents the most conscious thinking part of the working class, Economism and all the other schools of reformism personify a different and opposite part of its anatomy."

"No matter how indignantly they deny it, professional philosophers have been enlisted by the defenders of the status quo as allies in the struggle against Marxism."

"It is necessary for Marxists to tell the truth to the working class. If you fight under the banner of another class, if you abandon an independent class position, then the character of the movement is determined by the leaders, not by you. In the moment of truth, once the fighting is over, you will find yourselves cheated and robbed of the fruits of victory. The bourgeois who now speak only of Liberty will place their foot on your neck and you will be even worse off than before. You do not want to hear this message today? Very well. But life is a hard teacher, and tomorrow you will listen."

Malcolm X

"I believe there will ultimately be a clash between the oppressed and those doing the oppressing. I believe that there will be a clash between those who want freedom, justice and equality for everyone and those who want to continue the system of exploitation. I believe that there will be that kind of clash, but I dont think it will be based on the colour of the skin."

"Don't be in a hurry to condemn because he doesn't do what you do or think as you think or as fast. There was a time when you didn't know what you know today. "

"There is no better than adversity. Every defeat, every heartbreak, every loss, contains its own seed, its own lesson on how to improve your performance the next time. "

"You can't separate peace from freedom because no one can be at peace unless he has his freedom. "

“The future belongs to those who prepare for it today”

“We are living in an era of revolution, and the revolt of the American Negro is part of the rebellion against oppression and colonialism which has characterized this era....It is incorrect to classify the revolt of the Negro as simply a racial conflict of Black against white, or as a purely American problem. Rather, we are today seeing a global rebellion of the oppressed against the oppressor, the exploited against the exploiter.”

“You can’t operate a capitalistic system unless you are vulturistic. You show me a capitalist, I’ll show you a bloodsucker.”

“No religion will ever make me forget the conditions of our people in this country, No God, no religion, no nothing will make me forget it until it stops, until it’s finished, until it’s eliminated. I want to make that point clear.”

Political Influences - John MacLean

2005-06-15T14:08:00.000-07:00

"I wish no harm to any human being, but I, as one man, am going to exercise my freedom of speech. No human being on the face of the earth, no government is going to take from me my right to speak, my right to protest against wrong, my right to do everything that is for the benefit of mankind. I am not here, then, as the accused; I am here as the accuser of capitalism dripping with blood from head to foot."

John MacLean (1879-1923)

The “Scottish Lenin” as he was known, is someone I have recently came to regard as one of the most courageous class warriors to have walked the planet. A leader rather than a follower, he took on the workload of 2 or 3 men as he fought to educate and agitate for socialism amongst the workers on Red Clydeside. A schoolteacher by trade, his Labour College classes offered a Marxist education to the most advanced workers and trade unionists, teaching subjects like Marxian economics and trade union basics. Although I do believe that MacLean made certain mistakes towards the end of his life with regards to the British Communist Party I don’t think he can be criticised due to the immense pressure that grew upon him as the class struggle intensified. His mistakes we can learn from, but more importantly we learn from his burning revolutionary desire to change the world through the victory of the proletarian, in Scotland, in Britain and Worldwide.

Relevant Links

John MacLean Internet Archive

My Top 5 Socialist Books

2005-06-14T23:32:00.000-07:00

1. The Ragged Trousered Philanthropists (R.Tressell)

Described by countless people as the finest book of our time, RTP is a true masterpiece and finds the perfect balance between teaching socialist theory and putting it’s accounts of the conditions of the working class into a very enjoyable novel form. A work of true genius, essential reading for any socialist of any age.

2. Militant Miners (J.McArthur)

These recollections of a Fife miner were hugely important to me, being so close to home it was heartwarming to see the tremendous Marxist movement built in the kingdom at this period. Reading about the building of successful workers movements is always interesting, when it is on your doorstep though it adds an extra dimension. The fact that I also found a picture of my great Grandad (a miner) in the book made it seem all the more relevant and important to me.

3. Revolt on the Clyde (W.Gallacher)

The recollections of Fife born communist Willie Gallacher gives a great insight into the days of “Red Clydeside” and the workers movements in Glasgow during the days of the Bolshevik revolution in Russia. Because my family on my Mum’s side come from Glasgow, and with my Grans Dad being active in the communist movement in these days, these stories again felt very close to home and the history of the communist movement in Fife and Glasgow is something I will always find of extreme importance and interest.

4. History of British Trotskyism (T.Grant)

Ted Grant is a comrade I have an enormous respect for. He has produced many books and articles over the last half a century, this one I feel stood out because it took more of a novel form as he traced the “unbroken thread” of Trotskyism back to the early days of his life as a teenager in South Africa.

5. Hungarian Tragedy (P.Fryer)

Probably a surprising choice but again, this book won me over with it’s novel form which always makes picking a book up for the second time easier, and putting it down much harder. Fryer, a reporter for the Weekly Worker paper in Britain, was sent to Hungary to cover what was supposed to be a “counter-revolution”, what he witnessed however was much different, although when he sent these accounts back to his employer they slandered him and refused to print his works. This was the main factor in Fryer producing the book, which was a very well written and inspiring piece of work.

Wage Labour

2005-06-14T14:59:00.000-07:00

Although I have not yet tackled “the big ‘C’” or “Das Kapital” as it is better known, I do take an interest in Marxian economics. Understanding the production of surplus value by (productive) workers is the key to understanding the exploitation faced by workers as they live ultimately to create wealth for someone else.

Being a “productive” worker in economic terms does not mean that you produce a product, it means that you produce, or help to produce surplus value for your employer.

Classic examples of “unproductive” workers would be the police, the fire fighters and teachers. I recommend the article below on productive and unproductive labour as it goes into great detail on this very important topic.

I have also included a short play titled “How the Workers are Robbed” which is very clever and explains clearly the contradictions of capitalism.

How the Workers are Robbed

Productive and Unproductive Labour

Also, this cartoon (by Fred Wright) is very brief, but excellent nevertheless.

http://i10.photobucket.com/albums/a150/kalashnikov83/av-341.jpg

Socialist Material for Sale

2005-06-14T10:21:00.000-07:00

I have a number of Marxist books and pamphlets available at good prices. If you see anything that interests you then leave a message and I’ll get in touch with you, whats more if you order more than 3 things I will pay the p&p for you!

In the Cause of Labour – History of British Trade Unionism (book) £10

Reason in Revolt – Marxist Philosophy and Modern Science (book) £10

Russia – From revolution to counter-revolution (book) £10

History of British Trotskyism (book) £10

Lenin and Trotsky – What they really stood for (book) £10

What is dialectical materialism? (Pamphlet) £1

What is historical materialism? (Pamphlet) £1

Explaining Marxist economics (Pamphlet) £1

Trotsky - his life and ideas (Pamphlet) £1

Books also available online at the Wellred Marxist Bookshop

Political Influences - Frederick Engels

2005-06-12T12:38:00.000-07:00

"What is Communism? Communism is the doctrine of the conditions of the liberation of the proletariat. What is the proletariat? The proletariat is that class in society which lives entirely from the sale of its labor and does not draw profit from any kind of capital; whose weal and woe, whose life and death, whose sole existence depends on the demand for labor...."

Frederick Engels (1820-95)

A life long co-worker and loyal comrade of Karl Marx, considered by many to have been an “assistant” or “second in command” of Marx, though this is something I have constantly rejected since reading Engels’s masterpiece ‘Landmarks of Scientific Socialism’ or ‘Anti-Duehring’. Engels, in my opinion, was as equally as groundbreaking and theoretically advanced as Marx himself, this is backed up by his various articles on dialectical and historical materialism and the development of man through labour.

Relevant Links

The Frederick Engels Internet Archive

The joys of Unemployment

2005-06-12T12:23:00.000-07:00

I produced the following “article” (or rant) at the turn of the year after finding myself out of work for a period of around 10 weeks… believe me it seemed a lot longer!

For those of us unlucky enough to find ourselves unemployed today, as many people do, there can be no doubt that despite the claims of the bourgeoisie who insist that “there are plenty jobs”, getting back in to work is a very frustrating and difficult thing to do.

The ruling class, and the apologists of the “free market” speak with euphoria and glee about the great opportunities available for the unemployed, supermarkets, call centers and factories claim to be taking on hundreds of workers (usually for mind numbing routine tasks at minimum wage pay), but despite this bold claim it can be difficult for many people to become one of these “hundreds” of employees due to the sluggish application processes that are in operation by many large companies.

Despite the great technology advanced by the human race, and the wonders of the computer and it’s capabilities, combined with the job center attendant’s claims that you “should have a CV prepared” incase a potential job comes up, the companies seeking to “recruit hundreds of workers” choose to ignore both, providing you instead with a large application form to be filled out in pen, asking you exactly the same questions you had typed out on your CV.

Now it can be claimed that there is nothing hard about filling in the odd form, but when you are filling out five to ten of the bloody things, writing exactly the same thing over and over again, when the CV (containing all the information asked on the forms) sits unused on your desk you begin to feel slightly frustrated.

Once the application forms are handed in, the person may then be lucky enough to be invited to a “test” or “assessment” (It should be understood that stacking shelves or answering phones requires an immense level of intelligence) to determine whether they are worthy of a job, these “tests” can be a rather patronising experience, ranging from primary school maths questions, to watching mock video situations and grading “how well the employee has handled the situation”.

Before, or after the great “test”, some companies will also force the poor applicant to sit through a “presentation” which basically tells them how wonderful the company is, and how great it is to work for them. The bored and frustrated applicant of course is thinking “just give me a bloody job then!”

Once this session is over, the applicant will return home having been told that “we will be in touch”, or, if they are very lucky, they will be invited to an interview the following week, which means another week on the dole, more travelling expenses and more hanging around.

It is ironic that when the right wing denounce socialism, they say that “people will not work”, when under the system they claim to be “fair” and “natural”, many who are willing to work and are actively seeking a job, have the door slammed in their face. Willing and able workers are frozen out by the system, whilst our brothers and sisters in employment are usually working long hours and taking on the workload of more than one person.

In a fair and logical system of course the willing and able unemployed people would be given work beside the overworked people to ensure that the hours and the workload would be reduced, making life better for all. Unfortunately though we do not live in a fair and logical system, we live in a capitalist system, and the only people who benefit from such a system are a small minority of profit making employers who ruin the lives of millions in their endless quests for capital.

Political Influences - Leon Trotsky

2005-06-11T05:00:00.000-07:00

"Life is not an easy matter... You cannot live through it without falling into frustration and cynicism unless you have before you a great idea which raises you above personal misery, above weakness, above all kinds of perfidy and baseness."

Leon Trotsky (1879-1940)

Although heavily criticised by groups, parties and individuals on both left and right ends of the spectrum, the life of Leon Trotsky, his life and ideas, have had a great bearing on my own political development as a Marxist.

Trotsky, like any other revolutionary figure, was not without his mistakes, but his role in the building of the red army and the further development of Marxist theory has earned him much respect from thousands of workers throughout the decades.

Nowadays, the countless number of “Trotskyist” parties and groups in existence throughout the world do not play a very progressive role in the spread of genuine Trotskyist ideas, concentrating instead on competing against each other and taking suicidal “purist” positions on important international events concerning the revolutionary working class.

Nevertheless, I continue to hold comrade Trotsky in high regard. I have found his books and articles invaluable to my development and understanding. I will continue to raise the ideas of genuine Trotskyism through my involvements in the labour movement whenever possible.

A few years ago I had the pleasure of meeting with Trotsky’s Grandson Esteban Volkov at an international Marxist gathering in Barcelona. Comrade Volkov lived with Trotsky during his last years in Mexico. I found his recollection of those events as he addressed the meeting most fascinating and I was honoured to speak with him for a short period afterwards. I have included a report of this meeting in the relevant links below, I hope you will find it as interesting as I did.

Relevant Links

Leon Trotsky

The Trotsky Archive

Esteban Volkov speaks in Barcelona