|
Philosophy
|
Latest International NewsSchool Students' Union
Latest British NewsNew Book - 'Reformism or Revolution' - now available
Latest Trade Union NewsMarxist International Review
Wellred featured booksThe Communist Manifesto
Send us reports!Send us your letters, articles or workplace and trade union reports! Please get in touch and wherever possible we will publish submitted articles on our website or in our monthly paper Socialist Appeal. |
||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
Ted Grant seizes on evidence of a plot against the right wing Labour Prime minister Harold Wilson to show the real nature of the capitalist state. Behind the democratic façade the state is an organ of capitalist class rule. The establishment will strive might and main to preserve their privileges and will resort to whatever undemocratic measures are necessary to preserve the capitalist system.
Jews throughout the 20th century were attacked as either Communists or rich capitalists. According to this view there was some kind of conspiracy here to overthrow society as we know it. This is pure racist anti-Semitism, which Marxists utterly reject. Jews around the world, and in Israel, belong to different classes and thus have different interests. How does this affect their thinking? Walter Leon looks into the question and connects it to the ups and downs of the class struggle.
The second main thread in all the New Fabian Essays is a criticism of the totalitarian regimes in Russia, China and Eastern Europe, and the identification of Marxism with Stalinism. Here it is necessary to steer between two fatal mistakes. The one typified by the mixed group who maintained long and discreet silences about the crimes of Stalinism, with only the faintest trace of 'criticism'; and those who fail to make a distinction between the political regimes of Stalinism and the basic economic revolution on which the Stalinist bureaucracy and its satellites base themselves. Either mistake can be fatal for the developing left wing in the Labour Party.
Engels' pamphlet, The Part Played
by Labour in the Transition from Ape to Man, written in 1876, but not
published until 20 years later, contained many brilliant insights into the
theory of human development. Against a background of very scarce fossil or
other evidence, his application of the method of dialectical materialism to the
problem allowed him to provide a consistent and coherent explanation of human
development well in advance of the majority of his scientific contemporaries;
an explanation that remains to this day the main pivot of any Marxist view of
human development.
The
events of the past year or so, financial meltdown, political instability,
uncertainty over jobs and the threat that many workers could lose their homes
represents a huge shift in society, both internationally and especially in
Britain where the effects of the “credit crunch” have been particularly acute.
In the context of such a deep crisis the halcyon days of the “feel good factor”
and the “15 years of unbroken economic growth”, seem like ancient history.
For over a century Marxists have argued the need to take the banks and
other financial institutions into public ownership as part of the
socialist transformation of society. The founding document of
scientific socialism, the 'Communist Manifesto', in 1848 called for,
"Centralisation of credit in the hands of the state, by means of a
national bank with state capital and an exclusive monopoly."
Together with the same author’s
‘Materialist conception of history’ this is a brilliant introduction to
historical materialism. Clearly there are limits to the ‘what if’ way of
looking at historical processes, but the reader will no doubt find Plekhanov’s
conclusion that even such over-arching figures as Napoleon or Robespierre did
not fundamentally change the broad course of historical development compelling.
After all Plekhanov is defending the basic materialist conception of history,
i.e. that progress is determined by material forces that manifest themselves in
the activities of millions of people. He explains it well. In doing so he is
illuminating the interplay of accident and necessity in history.
Production
is carried on for profit, not for use. There is no provision that all those
able and willing to work will always be in a position to find employment; an
“army of unemployed” almost always exists. The worker is constantly in fear of
losing his job. Since unemployed and poorly paid workers do not provide a
profitable market, the production of consumers' goods is restricted, and great
hardship is the consequence. Technological progress frequently results in more
unemployment rather than in an easing of the burden of work for all. The profit
motive, in conjunction with competition among capitalists, is responsible for
an instability in the accumulation and utilization of capital which leads to
increasingly severe depressions. Unlimited competition leads to a huge waste of
labor, and to that crippling of the social consciousness of individuals which I
mentioned before.
William Morris is probably known best today as a designer of wallpaper
and fabrics. This is a travesty. Morris was a revolutionary socialist,
a Marxist. Morris read Capital when it was only published in German,
and therefore unavailable to most British workers. Inspired, he joined the Democratic Federation, later called the
Social Democratic Federation, the first British Marxist organisation.
From that time on he was a tireless agitator for socialism till his
last days.
In any historical period, the dominant ideas are those of the ruling
class. In 1989 the world was treated to the words of Francis Fukuyama,
who published an essay with the title 'The end of history?' His
argument was not that historical events had literally stopped happening
but that the collapse of so-called 'communism' in the Soviet union
meant that western liberal democracy had successfully established
itself as the ultimate and ideal form of government. Marxism lay totally discredited he declared, gloatingly.
Marxism is the memory box of the class, but more than that it is a
means to an end, a weapon in the hands of the working class. We don't
stand aside and carp like the sectarians, but play a role in the
movement and try to develop the struggles that take place. This is
precisely the approach that Marx advocated in the 'Communist Manifesto'
160 years ago.
The class struggle arises from the conditions of life of human beings.
It's a struggle of living forces; there are complicated and
complicating factors. Different industries have different conditions;
there are different traditions of struggle, different forms of
organisation, different political conditions over time and different
leaders.
Arms spending is vast. In 2008 global arms spending will be a record
£561 billion. This is seventeen times as much as the world spends on famine
relief (£32 billion). Obviously spending so much money has its effect on the
world economy. A central plank of the theory of the Socialist Workers’ Party is
the theory of the permanent arms economy. Mick Brooks looks at the view of
classical Marxism on arms spending and assesses the SWP’s theory.
