The Socialist 14 December 2001 [Top] [Home] [News] [The Socialist] 

Join the Socialist Party. For the full story subscribe to The Socialist

 

Build The Resistance

Fight for socialism

ON 13 and 14 December thousands of young people and workers will be marching on the streets of Brussels. They will be saying ‘No to war’, ‘No to privatisation and job cuts’, ‘No to poverty and inequality’ and ‘No to capitalism’.

The Socialist spoke to some of the demonstrators about why they are going to Brussels to protest at the European Union (EU) summit.

"The EU has issued a directive demanding rail privatisation in every member country. My RMT branch is sending a delegation to the summit protest as part of our fight against privatisation and to help build an international resistance to an international attack on workers." Bill, RMT member London Underground

 

"I’m from West Africa and have seen how capitalism is affecting the poor there. There is a growing class divide and that’s why people are becoming more angry and bitter. The war in Afghanistan is one of the ways the US is seeking to increase its power and capitalist interests and to control the wealth of the world".

Samuel

 

"This is a very dangerous war - not just for people in Afghanistan, but for the whole region which is already unstable. I’m going to Brussels because demonstrations like the ones in Seattle and Genoa make more people aware of the problems of capitalism and its institutions like the IMF, WTO and EU. I’m going with International Socialist Resistance (ISR). It is good that lots of young people will be meeting together from different countries. Finn

 

"The main problem is the difference between rich and poor. There are many people who don’t like the society we live in. The more people that demonstrate the more effect we can have in persuading people to join us. They will see that there are people who are fighting to change things - who have the ideas to change things."

Daniel

 

The Socialist 14 December 2001 [Top] [Home] [News] [The Socialist] 

Join the Socialist Party   For the full story subscribe to The Socialist

 

Hands Off The Health Service!

CRITICAL REPORTS about Coventry's hospitals have piled up relentlessly almost daily the local press reveals yet another failure. The Commission for Health Improvement (CHI) gave its ‘most damning report so far', exposing 'dangerous practices' such as putting five beds in four-bed wards. Nurses have told me how demoralising this is for them, as it seriously affects patient care.

Karen McKay, Socialist Party councillor, Coventry city council

Coventry's hospitals got a zero star rating in new league tables and heart bypass mortality rates are among the worst in the country. Trust managers, have been criticised for 'bullying and intimidation' so that senior clinical staff were afraid to raise criticisms. In its dealings with other bodies, the trust was described as arrogant and unwilling to listen.

But Trust chief executive, David Loughton is pleading for sympathy in the local paper, claiming he's a "victim of bullying" by those clamouring for his resignation. Six local MPs have even called in parliament for his resignation but he's grimly determined to cling on.

In a ballot, 66% of consultants declared no confidence in his leadership and demanded that he go - as has the local Community Health Council. But the trust chairman stepped down instead.

While recognising under-investment in our NHS is the main problem, the three Socialist Party councillors put a motion to Coventry council calling for Loughton's resignation. He's on a huge salary but doesn't accept responsibility publicly for the woeful state of our hospitals.

The new chairman worries that "he won't be able to convince patients that they're in safe hands". People have little confidence in our hospitals but praise for nursing staff is high.

CHI accused management of being so busy on the Private Finance Initiative (PFI) deal for a new hospital that they've neglected the running of the hospitals - and it's for the signing of this deal that Loughton is hanging on. Our two publicly owned hospitals will then be replaced by one privately owned which is being built on the outskirts of the city (on a flood plain) against public demand for the current city centre site.

Loughton and the trust aggressively pursued this site to pander to big business. The Socialist Party have campaigned on this for ten years, highlighting the cuts associated with these scandalous PFI deals.

Our motion also called for democratisation of hospital management. Trusts should be opened up to elections with direct accountability and genuine staff and patient involvement. Community Health Councils should not be abolished, but supported and given real power.

 

The Socialist 14 December 2001 [Top] [Home] [News] [The Socialist] 

Join the Socialist Party   For the full story subscribe to The Socialist

 

War in Afghanistan leaves conflict and chaos

"VICTORY TODAY can look a lot like defeat tomorrow". This quote from Time magazine (3 December) aptly sums up the situation in Afghanistan. Tony Blair has said that the "future is bright"; that the Taliban's flight from Kandahar and the agreement for an interim, power-sharing government, totally vindicates the coalition's war strategy.

That strategy has caused thousands of Afghan deaths and injuries, destroyed countless homes and turned millions into refugees. And for what? Not to end terrorism. The poverty and oppression suffered by millions around the globe and the lack of a mass socialist alternative to capitalism means that many more people will unfortunately turn in desperation to terrorist methods.

The US could kill bin Laden, bomb all 50 countries on its so-called 'terror hit-list' but terrorism would still flourish in the conditions which capitalism and their policies create. They are already looking for targets in Somalia. For some in the US administration, encouraged by the rapid collapse of the Taliban, this would just be a 'warm up' for taking on Iraq.

But Saddam is not the Taliban and as the Economist points out (8 December) there is no equivalent of the Northern Alliance in Iraq to do the US's fighting for them. Even Admiral Sir Michael Boyce, Britain's chief of defence staff, has admitted that this could "radicalise Arab opinion further" and provoke "wobbles" in the anti-terrorist coalition.

Beneath the spin of the politicians and generals, the situation on the ground in Afghanistan is far from rosy. The UN representative for Afghanistan reported that the talks in Bonn had been on the brink of collapse. UN officials and Western diplomats had to keep reminding delegates of the billions of dollars of foreign aid on offer (The Independent 6 December).

Shi'a Muslims, feeling underrepresented, complained that "it will be difficult for this agreement to survive like this for too long" (Financial Times 6 December). The 'butcher of the north', General Dostum, initially refused to have anything to do with the new government saying that he would block access to areas under his control. These include important oil and gas reserves.

He has since changed his mind. But for how long? This brutal warlord has changed sides more than any other commander. When last in control of Mazar-i-Sharif he had his own airline, currency and trade with the West.

Power struggles between warlords have broken out in most cities including Kandahar. Temporary power-sharing agreements could easily break down as they wage battles for their own power, prestige and booty. The areas surrounding and in between cities have degenerated into anarchy with roadblocks and checkpoints manned by armed bandits looting and terrorising.

It was the anarchic and chaotic conditions which reigned under these forces last time which allowed the Taliban to come to power in the first place.

Any foreign peacekeeping force could easily become caught up between feuding warlords or dragged into a guerrilla war with remnants of the Taliban.

Afghanistan's desperate people have had enough of war and violence but capitalism cannot offer them a stable future free from poverty. At least six million Afghans are refugees.

Iran has begun to forcibly repatriate refugees who have no homes to go to. The 60% of refugees in Pakistan not in camps are now being moved to border areas where they face terrible conditions.

In Bosnia, more than two years after the war ended, over one million refugees are still displaced. The situation in Afghanistan is even more desperate. The promised "billions of dollars of foreign aid", even if they materialise, will not be sufficient to create a decent life for people in this country ravaged by war and starvation.

For them and workers and poor around the world only socialism can guarantee freedom from poverty, oppression, conflict and war.

 

The Socialist 14 December 2001 [Top] [Home] [News] [The Socialist] 

Join the Socialist Party   For the full story subscribe to The Socialist

 

Racist Blunkett Blames The Victims

HOME SECRETARY David Blunkett has turned aside from devising new draconian "anti-terrorist laws" to making crass, racist comments about Britain's ethnic minorities.

Blunkett ignores that part of the new report on last summer's riots in Burnley, Bradford and Oldham that suggests that the nazi British National Party may have been involved.

He blames immigrants, insisting that immigrant communities integrate more and become "British", making sure their children adopt British "norms of acceptability" including learning the English language.

HUGO PIERRE, education convenor of Camden UNISON, comments: 

"Blunkett's statements about 'not being able to speak English' isn't even true. In Asian communities there's a very high level of understanding of English.

His whole aim is to get his government off the hook. Why does a Labour government allow jobs to disappear? Why are they selling off public services? And why are racial attacks on Blacks and Asians growing? Blunkett blames it all on Blacks and Asians who are their chief victims.

Racist housing policies and other factors force Asian families to move mainly into the poorer areas of towns and cities. Racist attacks - not taken seriously by the police - have forced people to move together where they feel safer and can also organise their own cultural activities.

But especially with the collapse of the big industries, racist employment practices also divide people. New Labour rules over a society with rising unemployment rates and high poverty levels, especially for Black and Asian communities.

Segregation exists in society; Blunkett's trying to blame the people forced to live in Britain's poorest areas for the problems this causes.

It's because of the New Labour government policies - their failure to solve the problems of unemployment, bad housing etc. - that some working-class people have turned in protest to far right parties like the BNP.

Blunkett's comments are a gift to the racist far right. Nick Griffin, leader of the nazi BNP has said that he will use Blunkett's policies in his party's campaigning leaflets!

Socialists need to expose Blunkett's lies. There's a very high proportion of young people in the ethnic minority communities who speak English and have high qualifications but many of them are unemployed or in low-paid, unskilled and temporary jobs.

Blacks, Asians and all workers need to get together in campaigns on jobs in particular. Trade unions have an important role to play.

The public sector has a lot more employment for Blacks and Asians than the private sector.

The unions should fight the creeping privatisation which the government is proposing. Such a campaign would also get support from most workers and help cut across the racism which Blunkett is shamelessly peddling."

 

 

The Socialist 14 December 2001 [Top] [Home] [News] [The Socialist] 

Join the Socialist Party   For the full story subscribe to The Socialist

 

Homeless Headcount Farce

IT'S CHRISTMAS so once again well-heeled politicians are scrambling for that photo opportunity with the homeless.

Steve Nally, London homelessness worker

Tony Blair's at it of course, with a large portion of New Labour spin. Government boasts that it is tackling homelessness ring a little hollow when you consider that around 400,000 people still live in temporary accommodation.

For them Christmas will not be full of cheer but laced with the stress of 'living' in hostels, bed and breakfast accommodation and squats. Add in the unknown figure of overcrowding and you have a situation in Blair's Britain where a sizeable amount of the population has no roof over their head that is decent and secure.

These are the hidden homeless - forever one step away from life on the streets and all its dangers.

New Labour, through its puppets in the Rough Sleepers Unit, now claims that rough sleeping has been slashed by two thirds. A recent headcount showed that the number of street homeless people had fallen to 500 from 1,850 in 1998.

Sadly, the headcount would be a farce if its consequences were not so tragic. In the run up to a street headcount enormous pressure is put on homeless agencies to take people in regardless of the difficulties it may cause. Sometimes the police are used to threaten arrest against those reluctant to go inside. In effect the streets are cleared in a cynical manoeuvre to massage the real figures down.

Once the count is out of the way many of those forced inside go back onto the streets, resentful at being used as pawns in government policy. This makes even harder the task of those genuinely working to bring people off the streets. So Louise Casey, the homelessness Tsarina, gets the praise while homelessness workers get the grief.

Government pressure to force homeless people off the streets means that many move away from the city centres to areas where they face problems accessing the services they need. In central London Westminster council treats the homeless as an eyesore to be moved on so that the wealthy and tourists do not have to see the reality for many in London today.

Homeless people do not need headcounts and hassle but safe, affordable, and where necessary, supported, housing.

This government's homelessness policy is all about image. In Blair's brave new world people sleeping in shop doorways are bad for business. Unfortunately with a world recession looming no amount of hype will stop even more people being driven onto our streets.

 

The Socialist 14 December 2001 [Top] [Home] [News] [The Socialist] 

Join the Socialist Party   For the full story subscribe to The Socialist

 

Fight Housing Privatisation

WALTHAM FOREST council in east London have been promoting the transfer of the whole council housing stock (at present 13,44l properties) to an 'arms-length' company or to a housing association, not even discussing the option of staying with the council.

Louise Thompson, chair of Waltham Forest Council Tenants' Panel and chair of the Investment Working Group

There is not an even playing field - councils have been starved of money for years and there have been housing bills introduced and policies imposed to make council housing less and less feasible to maintain. This is not a natural phenomenon. There is money available and policies can be changed.

Housing associations and arms-length companies are allowed to borrow money to build new properties that previously councils would have borrowed. Furthermore the government is blackmailing councils by agreeing to pay off outstanding mortgages on housing stock so long as they transfer the housing stock to a housing association or company.

Waltham Forest council has already applied to be allowed to set up an arms-length company in order to access over £50 million. They are also proposing to transfer part of the borough's stock to London & Quadrant Housing Association.

At a recent consultation meeting tenants were asked to split into groups to discuss the options they were most interested in. About ten people joined the arms-length company group and two or three joined the transfer to a housing association group.

The vast majority of the tenants elected to stay in the main hall to continue discussing the option of staying with the council.

Tenants voted unanimously for further meetings to discuss the options more fully. They demanded the right to be consulted in their own areas and they also wanted local councillors to be made to attend the meetings to listen to tenants and leaseholders.

We oppose privatisation in any form but that doesn't mean we should put up with the current state of council housing.

We need councillors who will stand up and campaign against privatisation of all public services including housing and fight to secure the money that is available so that councils can eliminate the repairs and maintenance backlog and commence a building programme to meet the needs of ordinary people for safe, decent homes at fair rents.

 

The Socialist 14 December 2001 [Top] [Home] [News] [The Socialist] 

Join the Socialist Party   For the full story subscribe to The Socialist

 

No To The Bosses' EU

No To War - Yes To Socialism

The Euro and the big business club

THE BIGGEST currency union in history will become a reality when the euro is introduced into 12 European states on 1 January 2002. Over 300 million people will see their familiar notes and coins phased out within a couple of months. Launched at the start of an international economic downturn, just how successful can the euro be?

Manny Thain

Wim Duisenburg, president of the European Central Bank (ECB), claims that: 'The euro is much more than just a currency. It is a symbol of Europe's integration in every sense of the word.' And the Basque separatist organisation, ETA, wants future hostage ransoms paid in euros.

There are still many technical difficulties to be overcome. For example, fewer than 10% of the eurozone's small and medium-sized companies consider themselves fully ready for the new currency.

These problems, however, are not the biggest obstacles facing the European Union (EU). The integration of the European economy has been spurred on by the cut-throat competition it faces from the North American Free Trade Agreement (NAFTA), dominated by US capitalism, and from the Association of South East Asian Nations (ASEAN), dominated by Japan.

Some of the restrictions on markets and trade between nation states have been overcome in the most recent phase of capitalism, popularly termed 'globalisation'. When the world market is expanding, the heads of corporations, finance capital and their backers in the political establishment are able to make handsome profits on the backs of workers in the neo-colonial 'Third World' and industrialised nations.

Since the South East Asian currency crisis in 1997, however, a general malaise has crept through the capitalist system. Up to recently, the US propped up the world economy - buying the world's goods and sucking in investment. Officially now in recession, the world's largest economy is leading a 'synchronised sinking' across the world. The Japanese economy - the second-largest - is now officially in its fourth recession in ten years.

Europe is not immune: 'New data are pouring in to suggest the 12-nation eurozone is heading for a serious slowdown, if not outright recession.' (Financial Times, 4 October)

Manufacturing in the EU fell in October for the sixth successive month and service sector output shrank in September. At the end of November it was officially confirmed that Germany - the world's third-largest economy, accounting for one-third of Europe's gross domestic product (GDP) - was in recession.

Germany, France and Italy are responsible for 75% of eurozone output but, according to the European Commission, they will not meet their targets for budget deficit reductions this year. Nor will Portugal.

German finance minister, Hans Eichel, fiercely criticised the mis-named 'stability and growth pact', which sets a budget deficit limit of 3% of GDP. If countries fall foul of this rule, they can be fined up to 0.5% GDP.

Ironically, Germany was one of its main proponents to curtail 'overspending' by the Italian state and as a condition for Italy's inclusion in the eurozone. Eichel now wants its dilution as the German deficit hit 2.7% of GDP, perilously close to the limit.

To comply with the stability pact, states have to raise taxes and/or cut public spending - which mean yet more attacks on working-class living standards. Eichel described the pact as a 'medieval torture chamber'. He meant that the restraints make it difficult for finance ministers to balance the books, especially at a time of economic downturn. But, in reality, the pain and suffering is inflicted on the working class and poor who, as always, are the ones expected to pay for capitalism's recurrent crises.

However France and Germany face elections next year, neither government wants to openly attack the working class. Their political survival relies on workers' votes.

Growing tensions

The eurozone ties governments down to a one-size-fits-all interest rate set by the ECB. But national governments cannot agree common economic and social policies when they face different economic conditions. And tensions between the eurozone states are being exacerbated by the spreading international recession.

Face-saving formulas will be used to cover policy u-turns. The ECB has said that eurozone governments can postpone budget stability targets if Europe fails to stage a healthy economic recovery in 2002: 'They say the stability pact, which the EU drafted in 1996, was drawn up under different economic conditions and should be "intelligently adapted" to take account of the downturn.' (Financial Times, 22 November)

The ECB does not administer the stability pact but its policies on inflation - especially eurozone interest rates - affect government policies. The original budget deficit targets were set against a projected growth of 3.2% in 2001 and 3% in 2002. The European Commission's latest (optimistic) forecast is for 1.6% and 1.3% respectively.

The EU faces a crisis of legitimacy. The 34% turnout in the Irish referendum on 7 June and its rejection of the Treaty of Nice underlined the lack of confidence in EU institutions, as well as being a rejection of Ireland's establishment political parties. It exposed the enormous gulf between the European people and EU institutions. The referendum reflected the common and correct perception that the EU is a club for big business and was all the more significant because Ireland has received substantial EU subsidies and has had high economic growth.

The timing of the euro could not be worse for the European capitalists. They did not foresee the recession. Its effects, coupled with the fact that the individual national governments will be the focus of popular discontent, will result in crises for the single currency. Although it is impossible to foresee exactly when, some states will break away eventually and could be forced to re-establish - at tremendous cost - new national currencies.

This does not necessarily mean that the euro would completely disappear. There could be a smaller currency union, for example, based around Germany and involving the Benelux states, which are inextricably linked to the German economy. There could be many different combinations.

European governments face hard times ahead. Not least from increased working-class opposition. Two massive general strikes in Greece - the most extensive and militant mobilisations for years - defeated the government's plans to attack workers' pensions. There have been important strikes this year by Lufthansa pilots, in Iberian Airlines and Air France flight attendants, Spanish bus drivers and rail and Tube workers in Britain, and Tesco workers in Ireland.

The EU was set up in the interests of the ruling capitalist classes - a bosses' Europe. However the EU develops, recession will bring an intensified onslaught against working-class people.

Nor would the break-up of the eurozone provide any respite. Only massive and united industrial action by the working class can push back the bosses' offensive. The most effective fight back would be based on international solidarity and a socialist programme.

Ultimately, only when society is controlled and run by the majority - the working class and oppressed - will it be truly democratic.

On the basis of workers' democracy and a voluntary federation of workers' states, a continental plan of production could be drawn up which took into account the needs of society and those of a sustainable environment. Then we would be talking about a genuine European union.

It is what the Socialist Party and the Committee for a Workers' International fights for - a socialist Europe.

 

The Socialist 14 December 2001 [Top] [Home] [News] [The Socialist] 

Join the Socialist Party   For the full story subscribe to The Socialist

 

International Socialist Resistance

INTERNATIONAL SOCIALIST Resistance (ISR) is a new youth organisation which has been initiated by Socialist Party members in England and Wales. Similar youth organisations have been initiated by sister parties of the Socialist Party across Europe.

On 13 and 14 December we will be protesting in Brussels against the war and against capitalism. Then on 15 December we will be coming together to establish an international youth organisation to which the national organisations can affiliate. The conference will discuss and agree a political programme and name. We think that International Socialist Resistance is the best name, for the following reasons:

International

International, because the rule of big business and the capitalist profit system extends across the entire globe, and means increasing exploitation, poverty and oppression.

The 11 September attacks and US President Bush's war on Afghanistan have brought home to young people that a very insecure future lies ahead for us under this system. Our generation has grown up in a world more divided and unjust than ever before.

In Africa, Asia and Latin America, the so-called 'third world', the situation for the overwhelming majority and especially for young people, is unbearable.

The gap between the rich and the poor is obscene. The assets of the three richest people in the world are more than the combined income of all the least developed countries and their 600 million people.

In Britain, as in many other countries of the world, young people of school age suffer from privatisation and cuts in education. A decent education is increasingly made available only to the rich. When leaving school, young people face unemployment or are forced into low paid, dead-end 'McJobs'.

The effects of the market economy globally have also resulted in environmental disaster. Industrial pollution and global warming are escalating. More than eight million people die each year because of polluted air!

Socialist

Socialist, because we need a society based on the needs of humanity, and not on profit. We do not believe that a better, more 'humane', form of capitalism exists. The capitalist system will always be based on greed, profit and the dictatorship of the market.

Regular economic swings from 'boom' to 'bust' are part of the system, bringing unemployment, mass poverty and attacks on what is left of the welfare state. Working within this framework cannot fundamentally alter our lives.

A socialist society would function to satisfy the needs of all human beings and the environment. It means the world's population owning and controlling the wealth they produce, and deciding how society should be run on a day-to-day basis. This would be genuine democracy!

The major corporations, the big finance houses and banks, and our basic utilities (railways, electricity etc) need to be taken out of the hands of the profiteers, and put into public ownership.

Resistance

Resistance, because we will be at the forefront of all the major protests against globalisation and capitalism.

We have already been involved in the demonstrations in Seattle, Prague, Nice, Gothenburg, Genoa etc. against summits of the global capitalist institutions.

The war in Afghanistan has now also brought a new layer of young people onto the streets to demonstrate against the actions of their governments.

Faced with a growing movement against their rule, the rich and powerful are attempting to strike back, using the police and armed forces of the state. Earlier this year, live ammunition was used against protesters in Gothenburg and Genoa.

A number of governments have used the terror attacks in the US as an excuse to rush in harsh legislation against civil and democratic rights. They will also try to use these 'emergency anti-terrorist measures' against the anti-capitalist movement. The movement must put up strong resistance to brutal policing methods and new legislation against civil rights.

And we support further direct action, based on mass mobilisations and democratic decision-making within the movement. We call for the broadest possible campaigns and protests, involving anti-capitalist youth, but drawing in organised workers in the trade unions too.

As well as participating in building the anti-capitalist movement, we will also link up with the day to day struggles in communities, schools and workplaces, against cuts, job losses and privatisation.

Join us and build the resistance!

 

The Socialist 14 December 2001 [Top] [Home] [News] [The Socialist] 

Join the Socialist Party   For the full story subscribe to The Socialist

 

SOCIALISTS SAY that the world’s mightiest power, the USA, has been fighting a war in Afghanistan to defend imperialist interests. But what is imperialism? And how, in a world with few direct colonies, do its needs still dominate the world? ALISTAIR TICE explains.

Imperialism - Wars Without End

THERE WERE empires long before capitalism. Ancient Greek and Roman troops conquered land, enslaved foreign peoples and amassed wealth for their slave-owning ruling class. Feudal societies seized new territories, e.g. in the ‘crusades’ against the Arabs of the Middle East.

The conquistadors annexed Latin America for the Spanish and Portuguese empires. Their looting of Aztec and Inca treasures contributed to the primitive accumulation of capital (start-up money) that led to capitalism’s birth.

So how does modern imperialism differ? As industrial production became bigger and more concentrated, the free competition of early capitalism gave way to the growth of monopolies.

With ever more money needed for investment, the banks were transformed into decisive financial institutions which determined credit and loans to even the biggest companies and so came to dominate the economy.

Meanwhile capitalism, first in Britain then in Europe and America, outgrew the limits of its own home market. Because capitalists make profits by paying workers less than the full value their labour creates, over time workers cannot afford to buy back all the goods they produce. The capitalists are then forced to find new markets, and sources of raw materials and cheap labour.

In the late 19th century, a handful of advanced capitalist nations mobilised armies and missionaries to colonise most of the world, through the "scramble for Africa" and by taking over such ‘virgin’ territories as Canada. Such ‘civilisation’ came at an enormous cost to millions of native peoples: genocide, war, disease, enslavement and exploitation.

As monopoly finance capital grew, the export of surplus commodities was superseded by the export of capital - not ‘aid’ to help colonial peoples, but "surplus". money that couldn’t be profitably invested at home but could make bigger profits through investments and loans abroad.

By 1889, Britain was the biggest trading country in the world but its income from finance capital invested abroad was five times greater than that from foreign trade!

Imperialism represents a specific stage of capitalism - the domination of monopoly finance capital, the export of capital, and the carving-up of the world between a few major capitalist powers, for spheres of influence to profit from markets, raw materials and cheap labour.

World wars

BY THE 1900s, little of the globe remained to be colonised: Britain, France and Germany had conquered 81% of the colonial world. So competing imperialist powers came into conflict over re-dividing the world.

Older British industry was challenged by Germany’s rising, more modern industry, which could only expand at the expense of rival imperialist interests, leading to the First World War which slaughtered some 26 million people.

Far from being "a war to end all wars", the uneasy truce after 1918 was shattered by the 1930s Great Depression which intensified trade rivalries, and the rise of fascism which needed military expansion to sustain itself. This inevitably led to the Second World War when up to 60 million perished.

If a third world war has been avoided since, it is only because during the fifty-year Cold War between Western imperialism (led by the USA) and Stalinist Russia nuclear weapons were developed which could ensure the ‘Mutually Assured Destruction’ (MAD) of both sides!

Instead, the biggest arms race in history occurred. The superpowers vied for spheres of influence in regional proxy wars in Africa, Asia and Latin America.

After 1945, the world hardly experienced one day of peace and the number of armed conflicts grew to over 60 in the 1990s. The 20th century, imperialism’s century, is the bloodiest in history, with up to 200 million killed in wars.

But the oppression of direct political, and often military, rule by imperialist powers, aroused the multi-millioned masses of the colonies. From the 1940s, anti-imperialist struggles and national liberation movements developed throughout Africa, Asia and Latin America.

Faced with these colonial revolts, it was increasingly costly, both economically and politically, for imperialism to maintain direct colonial rule.

So in many countries, after the war, imperialism beat a tactical retreat and granted formal independence to their ex-colonies, although leaving a bloody legacy of war (Vietnam, Angola and Mozambique) and divide and rule as in the partition of India/Pakistan and Palestine/Israel.

Neo-colonialism

HOWEVER, IMPERIALISM did not relinquish its indirect, but no less oppressive, economic domination. In fact, imperialist economic exploitation (called neo-colonialism) has intensified since independence, not lessened.

Ex-colonies are still forced to produce one or two crops (cash crops) or minerals for export to the imperialist economies. 60% of the under-developed nations’ export earnings come from just 18 raw materials! So, with a few favoured exceptions such as the Asian Tigers, the poorest countries cannot develop their own industries or compete with the West, so continuing their dependence.

Likewise, imperialism dictates the terms of trade. The prices paid by the West for raw materials in no way match the prices which the Third World pays for the manufactured goods sold back. Even oil, over which the Oil Producing and Exporting Countries (OPEC) exercise some control, would need to sell at nearly $100 a barrel just to match its 1950 price level!

As raw material prices have fallen, so has the Third World’s share of world trade. Africa with 10% of the world’s population accounts for less than 2% of world trade.

Over the last twenty years the chains of Third World ‘debt’ have been forged. After 1973, billions of dollars of oil money, recycled through Western banks, were loaned to the ‘developing’ countries. But interest rates soared in the early 1980s, leading to crippling Third World debts, now totalling $2,5 trillion.

The price of ‘rescue’ by the International Monetary Fund (IMF) and World Bank is "structural adjustment" ie deregulation, privatisation and deeper exploitation of these economies by Western banks and corporations.

Now, in a ‘bloodsucking’ twist to imperialism, there is actually a net export of capital from the underdeveloped to the imperialist nations - the Third World pays back more in debt repayments than it receives in ‘aid’ and investments!

Globalisation and imperialism

THE COLLAPSE of Stalinist Russia in 1989 left US imperialism as the world’s only economic and military superpower. The capitalists’ representatives then launched an ideological offensive removing the last vestiges of opposition to their neo-liberal policies from workers’ parties and Third World leaders alike.

Coupled with the deregulation of the financial markets in the 80s and new technology industries, this gave a huge impetus to the globalisation process.

Neo-liberal policies, backed up by the capitalists’ world institutions (IMF, World Bank and World Trade Organisation) have increased Western monopoly corporations’ domination of the world economy.

Today, just 300 multinationals and big banks account for 70% of all foreign direct investment. The 100 biggest companies now control 70% of world trade. And the fifty largest banks and financial companies control 60% of all global capital!

But this globalisation has only intensified the contradictions of capitalism and is now sucking the whole world economy into a synchronised recession.

Likewise, George Bush senior’s declaration in 1991 after the Gulf War, of a "New World Order" dominated by US imperialism, has brought no peace or stability to the world. Far from it.

The legacies of past imperialist policies (as in the Middle East and the Balkans), exacerbated by globalised exploitation of the world’s poorest countries, has led to three imperialist wars of intervention (Iraq, Serbia and Afghanistan) since 1991.

Imperialist adventures aren’t always just to gain or defend profit opportunities. US imperialism attacked Afghanistan to avenge the blow to US prestige after the 11 September atrocities. But America’s economic dominance ultimately relies on US military muscle to maintain its power and maximise its profits.

Imperialism truly does mean ‘wars without end’. We must build a mass movement, not just against current wars, but to end all wars, by overthrowing capitalism and building a socialist world.

 

The Socialist 14 December 2001 [Top] [Home] [News] [The Socialist] 

Join the Socialist Party   For the full story subscribe to The Socialist

 

New Labour's attacks on the benefits system

Workers Fight For Safety

THE HEALTH and safety dispute in Benefits Agency and Employment Service escalates this week with national strike action on 12 and 13 December. The vote in favour of this action demonstrates Public and Commercial Services union (PCS) members' determination to secure a safe working environment in Jobcentre Plus offices.

A PCS member

Socialist Party members in PCS welcome this escalation, however we do have real concerns about the PCS national executive committee's (NEC) decision for a return to work for members who have been on strike since September and October.

While members at risk in unscreened offices will continue with indefinite strike action, those members in screened locations will end indefinite strike action on 14 December.

Our concerns are that the NEC decision is not conditional on a return-to-work agreement, so it leaves the strikers unprotected. This position is not acceptable to Socialist Party members.

The return to work at this time means that pressure on management and scab workers will be reduced. The Christmas period is always a difficult time and at some offices management have cancelled Christmas leave arrangements. Therefore strikers will face having leave cancelled.

The run-up to national action should have seen a massive effort from PCS to ensure a successful turn out. Instead efforts have been split between campaigning for the strike action and seeking to negotiate a return to work agreement.

The decision to return some members to work means members receive the message that the union's support is dwindling, while management read the decision as weakness and division amongst the PCS leadership.

Socialist Party members put this to the PCS NEC but were outvoted. The NEC is dominated by the right-wing and these events clearly demonstrate the need for a united Left slate in the forthcoming elections. Only by ridding PCS of the wrecking influence of the right-wing will we be able to fully support members' interests. The Socialist Party in PCS supports Left Unity.

We urge all PCS members to vote for Left Unity candidates in the forthcoming elections for the union's executive committees.

 

The Socialist 14 December 2001 [Top] [Home] [News] [The Socialist] 

Join the Socialist Party   For the full story subscribe to The Socialist

 

Tory Cuts But Better Packaging

NEW LABOUR wants an American-style welfare system in this country. In some ways although they are continuing the Tory cuts they are more astute at packaging the attacks than the Tories.

Katrine Williams, Cardiff

New Labour is laying the blame on the individual for not having a job or being unable to work, promoting the principle that everyone has an obligation to help themselves through work wherever possible.

Every new benefit claimant under 60 will have to attend a 'work-focused' interview in the new agency Jobcentre Plus. Their claim will not be looked at until they attend and participate in the interview. Then regularly throughout the claim they will be required to attend 'work-focused' interviews. If they don't attend and participate then their benefit will be cut.

All these interviews will take place in an open plan Jobcentre-style environment. That also raises privacy as an issue for claimants discussing the nature of their illness or disability.

According to government surveys seven out of ten single parents want to work as well as 1.4 million disabled people. The areas with the highest levels of claimants on sickness and disability benefits or lone parent benefits are also areas of high unemployment where manufacturing and industry have been decimated and well-paid jobs are rare or non-existent.

New Labour is concentrating its efforts on increasing in-work benefits and allowing out-of-work benefits to fall behind.

Rather than subsidising low pay with in-work benefits such as Working Family Tax Credit the minimum wage should be raised above the poverty threshold to £7.50 an hour so that people are actually able to escape the poverty trap.

Resources should be put into forcing employers to pay a living wage and bring them to book if they discriminate against single parents, the disabled or throw older workers onto the scrap-heap.

Rather than paying tax credits, resources should be put into public-sector good quality childcare, free to all. Benefits should be straightforward to claim without any compulsion - the real task is to create a system where all those who want to work have a real opportunity to do so without facing a future in poverty, trapped on means tested benefits.

 

The Socialist 14 December 2001 [Top] [Home] [News] [The Socialist] 

Join the Socialist Party   For the full story subscribe to The Socialist