Saturday, October 3, 2026

SPGB Snippets: The punishment of Christa Pike (2026)

From the Socialist Party of Great Britain website 

October 3, 2026
A dark abyss of cruelty lies behind capitalism’s glitzy facade. Christa Pike spent 31 years on Death Row for murder while lawyers launched appeal after appeal. The trial jury were never told about Pike’s hideous childhood: ‘Pike was physically and sexually abused by several of her mother’s husbands and boyfriends, and raped several times, once when she was 11 and again aged 17. Later, it was discovered that she was repeatedly raped as a toddler by her grandmother’s boyfriend.’

Unmoved, Tennessee’s governor, and the Supreme Court, refused to stop the execution. But the lethal injections failed, leaving Pike with possible brain damage. Her endless punishment is just one story in a trail of broken lives left by a world obsessed with money, power and bloody revenge.

New Blog Page: Proper Gander (Extras)

Back in July I posted on the blog a page dedicated to the Proper Gander TV Column, which is celebrating its 15th anniversary in the Socialist Standard this year. 

Following up on that, I thought I would compile a list of the twenty most popular Proper Gander TV Columns . . . according to blog stats, that is. Any opportunity to prod readers of the blog into exploring the Socialist Standard archive.

If you click on the month and year, it will lead you to the article.

20. Music For The Masses (Nov 2017)
19. Delicious Chips For Their Tea (Mar 2018)
18. Lights . . . Camera . . . Political Action? (Feb 2024)
17. Porn and Real Life (Sep 2014)
16. Home Truths (Aug 2017)
15. Back To The Future (Sep 2016)
15. YouTube And You (Feb 2020)
15. Flat broke (May 2023)
12. Alice Through The Looking Glass (Apr 2019)
11. The Benefits Trap (Jan 2017)
10. Maid In America (Jul 2017)
09. Monarchy Malarkey (Jun 2016)
08. Theroux the keyhole (May 2026)
07. The Vegan Revolution (May 2017)
06. Living The Dream (Dec 2016)
05. Mistaken Identity (Aug 2019)
04. Peering At The Peers (Apr 2017)
03. Super marketing (Sep 2023)
02. Bitter Pill (Mar 2015)
01. The Hand-Made Tale (Mar 2019)

This Month's Quotation: Socialist (1935)

The Front Page quote from the October 1935 issue of the Socialist Standard
"Not altruism but the lust for profit is the cause of modern wars . . . "

Trade Union Leaders in Confusion (1935)

From the October 1935 issue of the Socialist Standard

The Sixty-seventh Annual Conference of the Trade Union Congress met in the shadow of war, and its President, Mr. Kean, opened the proceedings with a touching, if incoherent, appeal for peace. Italy, he said, must be coerced into keeping the peace, by means of economic and financial embargo and, perhaps, by closing the Suez Canal, even if such action led the League Powers into a war with Italy. That is, we must have peace at all costs, even if we have to go to war for it. The logic is shaky, but the meaning is clear enough. Another war to end war! And the T.U.C. and the Labour Party are as blandly ready to send the workers to the shambles as if the last war had never happened.

Mussolini, cries Mr. Kean, "knows no moral principle”—so “we” should bring out “our” poison-gases and long-range guns, to convince him how much loftier are “our" principles. Mussolini has made an “unjust and rapacious assault” on Abyssinia; so Great Britain, upheld by the comfortable conviction of moral superiority, given her by the tale of her just and generous acquisition of world empire, must teach him to play the game according to the rules. The subject races of the British Empire might inquire eagerly just what those rules are; but, of course, ignorant black men cannot be expected to comprehend civilised society. The British T.U.C. apparently does not comprehend it either. They spent days reading the riddle: “When is a war not a war?” and reached the solution, “When the other side call themselves Fascists.” Thus the Fascist is being used to fill the place occupied by the “Hun” in 1914; and the T.U.C.—together, be it noted, with the Communists, with whom they refuse to associate—tell the workers that it is their interest to take up arms against Fascism.

Leaders Mislead the Workers
What a highly convenient catchword is this “Down with Fascism” rallying-cry! Just the slogan needed to disarm the “Left-wing” resistance to war, and transform anti-militarist campaigns into frantic clamouring for the defence of Abyssinia. And these “leaders of the working class” are so muddle-headed in their principles and policy that they are voluntarily playing the game of the National Government—the very Government they have in the past so often and so bitterly attacked. Give them a war they can condone, a slogan obscuring the basic issue, and they readily, unreflectingly, follow the example of the Social-Democrats and others whose 1914-1918 war record will not bear examination.

The S.P.G.B. maintains that the “Fascism” aspect of the matter is the superficial excuse necessary to render war acceptable. The underlying issue is an economic one—the workers of all the countries involved are to be used as tools to make possible the extraction of profit from Abyssinia. Great Britain is inextricably concerned, since Abyssinia is surrounded on almost all frontiers by British territory; since the Blue Nile, source of Egypt’s essential floods, rises in Lake Tana; and since Eritrea and the Somalilands are on the route to India. The British capitalist group are not anxious for war at present; but neither do they want Italy to corner all the profits they foresee in the development of Abyssinia. Therefore, the politicians at Geneva and elsewhere have been treading the knife-edge of diplomacy, endeavouring to give Italy concessions large enough to stave off war, without actually giving Italy a monopoly of Abyssinian exploitation. The workers of the world have no interest in these jugglings. What reason is there for them to support one section of their exploiters against another? Whichever side wins the wage-slaves will still be wage-slaves; the basic problem of present society will remain unsolved.

The S.P.G.B. maintains, as it has done consistently throughout its thirty-one years' existence, that the workers' interests are inescapably opposed to those of the capitalists, whatever political and national trimmings the latter may use to mask their ends. When the workers open their eyes to the facts of their exploitation, and cease to be taken in by the multifarious propaganda of the capitalists and their tools, they will see that their own interests lie simply and only in an entirely new system of society—Socialism—and will struggle indefatigably to establish it. Under Socialism the entire absence of the profit motive will once and for all eradicate the cause of war. When the workers have set up Socialism, then, and only then, will war be impossible.

Equality for Women Workers
Not a word of this did we hear from the T.U.C., and equally indefinite and non-socialist was their attitude on Britain’s internal problems. The economic position of women, the plight of the depressed areas, and the battle for shorter hours were all discussed from a purely reformist standpoint. All these problems are inherent in capitalism, but the T.U.C. conveys the impression that they can be solved piecemeal, without touching the basis of society. This impression is false: some improvements may benefit sections of the workers for a time, but the working class as a whole can never escape from exploitation by such painting the sores of capitalism. The first essential of capitalist society is an army of wage-slaves, people dependent for their lives on the sale of their energies in the labour-market ; and the commodity labour-power commands only the price necessary, for the labourer to continue his existence and reproduce his kind. That is, the workers as a whole—whatever differences and fluctuations may occur in particular sections at particular times—receive as the price of their labour-power little more than enough to keep them alive. This is an integral part of capitalism. Suppose women succeed, as the T.U.C. hope, in obtaining equal wages with men. Are they any the less exploited wage-slaves? By all means let them, in common with all their class, fight against the encroachments of their masters, but let them not be deluded into believing that their principal task. They must realise that these encroachments can be made impossible only by doing away with the private ownership of the means of life, which produced their enemy, the master class.

The Workers a “Depressed” Class
The T.U.C., with penetrating insight into social cause and effect, further disclosed to an astounded world that “the stricken areas owe their lamentable position to the decline in their main industries.” We have heard also that the circular movement of the globe on its axis may be explained as being due to the rotation of the earth. The T.U.C. was full of warm-hearted sympathy about the “shame and pity" of the depressed industries' situation, but spent no time analysing its true causes, or pointing the obvious way out. We state that these areas are “stricken" simply because the capitalists of this country cannot at present envisage making profits from them, owing to foreign competition and to more attractive investing fields elsewhere. Moreover, the whole working class all over the world is ”stricken" and lives in a state of permanent “depression.” The difference between these areas and others which receive less publicity is one of degree, and not of kind. It has been often and authoritatively stated that most workers, whether employed or not, have neither sufficient food, adequate clothing, nor sanitary homes. Such conditions are an integral part of capitalism.

Similarly, the question of hours is one which can never be solved so long as the human race is divided into two opposing camps, one owning the means of life and the other divorced from ownership, the one buying and the other selling labour-power. The buyers and sellers of labour-power have irreconcilable interests, and until private ownership and the buying and selling of labour- power is stopped for good, the haggling and wrangling over its price and time of its use must inevitably continue.

Down with all the War-makers
Finally, the T.U.C. decided to exclude Communists from holding official positions in Trades Councils. At about the same time the Communist Party announced its readiness to affiliate with the Labour Party. The T.U.C. officially stigmatised the Communists as a disruptionist element. Yet on the Abyssinian issue the Communist and T.U.C. policies are identical. So they blow hot and cold and make confusion worse confounded. The S.P.G.B. has indeed every logical reason to claim that it alone, in this maze of capitalist politics, is treading the direct path to Socialism. The Communist Party’s attitude in the Abyssinian crisis must have demonstrated unmistakably to many of its erstwhile supporters how capable that Party is of running with the hare and hunting with the hounds. Why further the declared policy of a capitalist Government? Why differentiate between national sections of the world capitalist class? To dam up Italian colonial expansion in Africa, which is so attractive to Italian capitalism, is merely to bring a European explosion so much nearer. To defend Abyssinia against Italy is merely to hand it over for capitalist exploitation by the native ruling class in alliance with Britain or France, or to split it up among various Powers. Abyssinia is due to be “civilised” by some capitalist group in any case. But the Communist Party is willing to lead British workers to slaughter Italian workers under the banner “down with Fascism and war." They remind us of Butler’s “Hudibras,” whose
    "Brain 
Outweighed his rage but half a grain, 
Which made some take him for a tool 
That knaves do work with, called a fool.”
Once again we must reiterate that these internecine squabbles, for all the fine phrases used as top dressing, are no concern of the working class. The paramount issue in the world to-day is the struggle for Socialism. The S.P.G.B. calls on the workers throughout the world to realise their class position, and to determine to end class-society and all its evils by organising consciously and politically for the one end, of establishing Socialism.
D. S.

Letter: The Future of Palestine (1935)

Letter to the Editors from the October 1935 issue of the Socialist Standard

Blogger's Note:
This letter was in response to a two part article that appeared in the July and August 1935 issues of the Socialist Standard.

The Future of Palestine

Amhurst Road, E.8,
August 25th, 1935.

The Secretary,
The Socialist Standard, 
42, Gt. Dover Street,
S.E.1.

Dear Sir,

Kaye and Scrutator have gone to great lengths and to a good deal of trouble to show the fallacies of Zionism and the utter uselessness of a Jewish State. In their eagerness to “prove” their theories they have written quite a number of words, quoted a lot of phrases torn from their context, said quite a lot of irrelevant (and shallow) things, but have not given one single and valid reason why the Jewish people, out of all other peoples who inhabit this unhappy earth, should not possess a country of their own, where they should be able to lead a normal national life, unhampered and unhindered by the tremendous forces which, everywhere, make Jewish life a burden and an encumbrance.

In their quotations referring to conditions in Poland, they show that prominent Jewish employers refuse to employ Jewish labour. In a Jewish State this would, of course, be automatically impossible. On the other hand, they blame the Zionist authorities for disqualifying Jews from membership from the Z.O. who do not employ Jewish labourers! This | is only one glaring example of the shallowness of your writers.

There are many more. “Many Jewish workers in Germany,” they state, “knew the terrors of unemployment long before the coming of Hitler” | (does this mean that Hitler is, after all, not such a bad fellow?). Precisely so. Only that this fact, which also refers to Poland and many other countries, proves conclusively how necessary it is for the Jewish people to have a country of their own, where they will not be subjected to unemployment because they are Jews, and where, since your scribes seem to be so deeply concerned about the religious requirements of the Jewish workers, a Jewish Government will impose Saturday as a day of rest.

One does not know whether it is sheer stupidity or malice when your writers assert that "in the more developed capitalist countries, conditions are not so favourable for the growth of anti-Semitism.” In view of what has been happening in one of these “more developed capitalistic countries”—Germany —where even the “joint control of huge undertakings by Jewish and non-Jewish capitalists” does not tend to “weaken racial prejudice,” one must be utterly blind or foolish to state that there “is little danger from pogroms in advanced capitalist countries,” when for 2½ years there has been one continuous, incessant and intensive-pogrom of the most efficient and gigantic variety, and where Jewish capitalists, middle-class people and Jewish workers alike have been mercilessly and ruthlessly ousted from their homes and positions and are prevented from earning a living and doomed to certain death and extinction. The same process, only not so thorough, goes on in Poland and in Rumania, and elsewhere, where the ruling and capitalistic class are not at all afraid that anti-Jewish “riot and bloodshed would upset the delicate mechanism of capitalist trade and finance.”

“Even in Germany,” your scribes console us, “at the height of the Nazi triumph, there has not been a pogrom of a Czarist character.” Is then a pogrom less beastly and cruel because it takes place, like in Germany, not in the open market-place, but in the concentration camp or in the subterranean passages of the Brown Shirt Headquarters? Or are all the reports contained in the Brown Book and in the hundreds of newspapers mere figments of the imagination, and the result of what Hitler and his gangsters call “Greuel-propaganda” ?

As to the unlikelihood of anti-Jewish riots in a city like London, perhaps I may refer your scribes to what happened in a “city like Berlin” only a week or two ago, on the Kurfuerstendamm, where “valuable property in which many non-Jews are interested” exists, and where the police had no desire to “keep such a mob in hand.”

The extremely complicated Jewish problem is not at all safe even in the hands of the working classes. In Germany and in Poland, Rumania and elsewhere, the working classes are the first to destroy Jewish property and mutilate Jewish lives, and we have even read in the London Daily Worker that the slaughter of Jews in Palestine in 1929 was the rising of the Arab masses against Jewish exploitation. Jewish exploitation by 65 poverty-stricken Talmud students in the ”Yeshibah” of Hebron! We have also seen how a Labour Government, then in full power, instigated a slaughter of 150 Jews in Palestine in August, 1929, how that Government treated the all Jewish demand for protection with the greatest and cruellest callousness, how that chief culprit, Lord Passfield, an avowed Socialist, and then in charge of the Colonial Office, has, as a result of the ghastly slaughter by Arabs of Jews, punished the Jews, curtailed their rights, suppressed their aspirations, and rewarded the Arab murderers, extended their rights and encouraged them in their devilish designs. It was that very Socialist who said that he bad no sympathy with the aspirations of the new generation of working Jews, but that he understood and sympathised with the old, the pious, i.e., the idle, Jews! So much for the safety of the Jew under a Labour Government. That Labour Government, too, was unable, or unwilling, to “keep such a mob in hand,” and allowed the iniquity to go unpunished. The Mufti, that arch-murderer, is still a persona grata with the British authorities.

It will thus be seen that there is no remedy for the Jewish problem except a Jewish State. It has long been recognised that all classes of Jews not only suffer in common with all classes of humanity, but that they are subjected to very special—and inevitable —sufferings and persecutions which are alone the result of their being a pariah among the nations for the last nineteen centuries. All attempts to solve this vicious problem have so far failed. As a Zionist theoretician puts it: “To be robbed as a Jew is equally humiliating, equally hurtful to the self-respect of the Jew, as it is to be protected as a Jew/1 Judeophobia is an hereditary form of demonopathy, peculiar to the human race, and anti- Semitism is based upon an inherited aberration of the human mind.

No people, generally speaking, has any predilection for foreigners. This has its ethnological basis and cannot be brought as a reproach against any people. But the Jews, more than any other people, are subject to this dislike. Every foreigner is more or less respected because he can repay in his own country with the same coin. The Jew, alone, because he has no country. remains the stranger “par excellence.” He remains a refugee always, and who is the refugee to whom a refuge cannot be refused ?

The real panacea for the Jewish problem, and the only one, is and remains a Jewish State. And in that State, according to the best Jewish and Zionist traditions and teachings, there shall be “one law for the citizen as well as for the stranger that dwelleth in its gates.”
I am, Sir,
Yours faithfully,
Jacob Sarna.


Reply.
It is a pity that Mr. Sarna offers no evidence to support his accusation that we have torn phrases from their context in our anxiety to misrepresent the Zionist position. Our correspondent, evidently, does not share our eagerness to "prove” things.

The attitude of our critic is that of a nationalist. He writes about Peoples. We analyse society in terms of classes. To him the Jewish "problem” is the problem of the Jewish people. To us all problems are to be examined in the light of working-class interests. A considerable divergence of opinion is expected in these circumstances.

We should be glad to learn more about this “normal national life" from which Jews are debarred. May we remind Mr. Sarna, that in the United States of America, one of the wealthiest countries in the world, according to Senator T. H. Caraway, there were in 1930 1,000 deaths a day from starvation (Daily Telegraph, February 2nd, 1931). There are now about 12,000,000 unemployed, and millions more are in misery and want. Here in England, hundreds of thousands of people are on the borderline of starvation. Surely this is not what Mr. Sarna, and those who think with him, are striving so hard to attain? We are afraid it is. Palestine must be developed on capitalist lines, they say; then it will produce the same conditions. We suggest that it is precisely these conditions which are the “tremendous forces" that hamper and hinder Jewish workers, and all workers, the world over.

It is obvious that in a Jewish State where presumably the bulk of the population would be Jewish, the employing class would have no option but to exploit Jewish workers, unless they had facilities for importing cheaper labour. What of the cheap negro and continental labour which the American capitalists imported into “God’s own country” ? Industrial history is full of examples of how employers have used “foreign” labour to break down strikes or to lower the standard of living. Furthermore, we did not, as Mr. Sarna suggests, BLAME the Zionists Authorities for any of their actions. We merely gave this information in order to prove that it was unnecessary for the Jews to wait for Sir Oswald Mosley or Adolf Hitler to make them unemployed, as Mr. Smilansky and his capitalist colleagues in Palestine, Manchester, London, and Warsaw have no compunction, when their interests dictate, in sacking their “fellow" Jews. A capitalist, be he Jewish or British, in London or in Jerusalem, has as his first consideration, the making of profits.

Mr. Sarna objects to Jewish workers being unemployed because they are Jews. We go further. We object to Jewish workers, and all workers, being subjected to unemployment because they are surplus to the needs of capitalist industry. Our argument is that the overwhelming majority of unemployed Jewish workers are such because they are privileged to enjoy some of the blessings of our “normal national life.” This is not a defence of Hitler. It merely proves that Hitler and other individuals are not responsible for the existence of unemployment. Why Mr. Sarna believes we are deeply concerned about the religious requirements of Jews, is a mystery yet to be solved.

Our correspondent betrays his ignorance of German political conditions, and we must advise him to make sure of his facts before he again rushes into print. One of the reasons for Hitler’s advent to power is that the German workers had not yet become accustomed to the altered political conditions since the setting up of the capitalist republic after the War. There are also millions of small property owners, peasants, and petty proprietors of workshops in Germany, and these people are very susceptible to anti-Semitic propaganda. Large areas in Germany, are as yet, relatively untouched by industrial development. Mr. Sarna should also keep in mind that most of the Nazi victims in concentration camps are political prisoners, and in view of the support given by numbers of Jews to the Social Democratic Party, it is not surprising to find some of them there together with Communists and Catholics. There is one other point; Mr. Sarna's attitude, and that of other Jews, to this vexed question of brutality and violence, is peculiar and rather limited. They fume with indignation over the atrocities of Hitler, but are strangely silent when the name of Mussolini is mentioned. Marshal Pilsudski, the late dictator of Poland, well known as a pogrom-inciter during and immediately after the War, was lauded to the skies in the Jewish Press on his death. Our sympathies are much larger than Mr. Sarna’s. We also sympathise with the workers who are ill-treated for their political views. Nor would the establishment of a Jewish State on Revisionist lines safeguard the Jewish workers from brutalities at the hands of their “brother” Jews. In order to show how closely the Revisionist organisation is modelled on Fascist lines we shall give a further quotation. In the " Blue-White papers, 1935," published by the Revisionists, there appears a short account of the brown-shirted Revisionist youth organisation, the Berit Trumpeldor. The following are some clauses from their “ Heptalogue ” : —
(1) The Jewish State as the purpose of your own life.

(2) “ Monism ” in the sense of rejecting all subservience to slogans not connected with the Jewish State, especially that of the “ Class War ”

(4) The duty of self-defence, and readiness to join a Jewish Legion should necessity arise . . .
As regards the destruction of valuable property in the streets of Berlin some weeks ago, the “valuable property” destroyed consisted of some broken windows, tables, chairs, crockery, and some smashed windscreens (see Jewish Chronicle, 19/7/35).

We do not understand why Mr. Sarna should have brought The Daily Worker, Lord Passfield, and the Labour Government, into the discussion. Mr. Sarna must know that we are opposed to the Communist Party and the Labour Party. It is absurd of Mr. Sarna to try to foist responsibility for The Daily Worker's nonsense, and the Labour Government’s colonial policy on to the Socialist Party.

Therefore we are on unassailable ground when we urge the Jewish workers not to waste their energies struggling for something out of reason, and which, if achieved, would confer very doubtful and dubious advantages on them, and urge them to assist us in the task of establishing Socialism. The disabilities they suffer as Jews are inextricably bound up with the far greater disabilities they suffer as members of the working class.

Mr. Sarna believes that anti-Semitism is based upon an “inherited aberration of the human mind.” We contend that anti-Semitism in the modern world is mainly a smoke screen used by nervous sections of the ruling class in order to distract the minds of the workers, and to cover the class struggle. It is a means of diverting class-antagonism into racial hatred, and of splitting the workers into warring groups. By trying to fool the workers with fairy stories about the intrigues of secret councils of Jews planning to overthrow all Christian states; of conspiracies of “Jewish” capital, it is hoped to discourage revolutionary ideas. Anti-Semitic propaganda can flourish best where there is an inexperienced and uninformed working class. The only real solution for the Jewish problem is the spread of Socialist knowledge, which teaches the workers that the main struggle is between worker and capitalist. It dispels the illusion, fostered by Zionist and anti-Semite alike, that racial and national distinctions are of concern to the workers.

The spread of Socialist knowledge will bring nearer the day when we can say good-bye to capitalism, and build up a Socialist system of society, which will involve the ”emancipation of all mankind without distinction of race or sex.” Instead of this, Mr. Sarna offers to Jewish workers something which will not bear a moment’s examination, as can be seen from the opening paragraph of his letter. He asks why the Jewish people, out of all other peoples who inhabit this unhappy earth, "should not possess a country of their own.” Note these words, “possess a country of their own.” We challenge Mr. Sarna to show us how it will be possible for Palestine to be possessed by the Jewish people, in view of the fact that it is to be run on strictly capitalist lines, which means, of course, that it will be monopolised by the capitalist class, like all those other countries at which Mr. Sarna casts such envious eyes, but which he himself dubs “unhappy.”
Kaye & Scrutator

Friday, October 2, 2026

Notes of the Month: Labour Party Problems (1935)

The Notes of the Month column from the October 1935 issue of the Socialist Standard

Labour Party Problems
 
Whilst the Labour Party has officially declared for sanctions against Italy should the latter carry out its threat of attacking Abyssinia, this attitude has met with disapproval from many of its own members, including several prominent officials. Mr. Lansbury has threatened to resign his position as Leader because the application of sanctions may involve the use of armed force. He is now opposed to all wars, because "they are against the teachings of Christianity.” He has now evolved a plan which will, in his opinion, put an end to all possibilities of wars in the future. This is nothing less than the “sharing of all the raw materials, markets and unoccupied territory of the world.” He wants the League of Nations to appoint a commission of economic and scientific experts to draw up a scheme for carrying out these proposals.” They could quite easily tell us how to meet the insistent demands of Italy, Germany and other nations for expansion, and how to pool natural resources, develop the markets, and satisfy the demands of the millions of people starving and sick in Asia, Africa and Europe.” (Daily Herald, September 16th, 1935. Italics ours.)

That Mr. Lansbury can hope that the present owners of territory, mineral resources, etc., will relinquish or share their property unless forced to do so is sheer madness. That he expects such a scheme, even if carried out to “satisfy the demands of the sick and starving millions,” is equally illusory. The “sick and starving millions” are the propertyless workers and peasants, and they are as much a feature of the countries already in possession of raw materials, territory and markets such as Britain, France and the U.S.A. as they are of Germany, Italy Abyssinia, or any other country. The world now belongs to the capitalists and not to the workers, and if it is parcelled out in different proportions or pooled among the present owners, how can that benefit the proletariat?

* * *
 
“Pious ” Enemy No. 2.

The Archbishop of Canterbury is also a Christian. Nevertheless, he can foresee circumstances in which a war may become “Christian." In his broadcast on September 1st he made it clear that, in his opinion, a war fought with the blessing of the League of Nations had also the blessing of the Church. We would add that history does not tell us of many wars in which the Church has withheld its “blessing.”

* * *

Where Does he Stand?

Sir Stafford Cripps is the Chairman of the Socialist League, an organisation affiliated to the Labour Party. He is opposed to Labour’s policy of sanctions, and does not agree with its support of the League of Nations. In an article in the Sunday Referee (September 15th, 1935), entitled ”Where I Stand,” he says: “While capitalism controls our national, and imperialism our international life, the actions of our Government will be determined by capitalist and imperialist interests.” Correct, Sir Stafford, but how do you square that statement with your membership of the Labour Party, which plainly holds the opposite point of view?

* * *

United Front at Last

The Communists seem to have achieved their hearts' desire, that much-sought-after "United Front." And it is of a magnitude that must exceed their most sanguine hopes. For on the Italian-Abyssinian dispute they are solidly behind the National Government (or should we say in front of them?). "The League's Covenant must be upheld by all means at our disposal," declared Sir Samuel Hoare, British Foreign Minister, in a speech at Geneva. And he has the solid support of the bulk of the Labour Party, the whole of the Liberal Party, and most certainly the Communist Party, who have issued impressive-looking proclamations, urging the public to support the League. As their sponsors at Moscow are now members of the League this is not surprising. But their attempts to explain their "policy" are ludicrous. Lenin's condemnation of the League as a “Thieves' Kitchen" still holds good with us, though the disciples of Lenin grace its functions. And what has become of their erstwhile boast, to "turn every imperialist war into a civil war " ?

* * *

Where we Stand

"The people who do not own a country and its resources have nothing to fight for excepting Socialism "! That is our policy. The workers of Abyssinia, many of whom are still chattel-slaves, should not be inveigled into fighting for the property of Abyssinian princes. The workers of Italy have nothing to gain by fighting to secure more territory and raw materials for their masters. And the business of the workers the world over is not to take sides with either of the two Governments, or any other Government or League of Governments. Their business is to take the world out of the hands of the present owners and make it the possession of all. That is not the attitude of any other political party in this country.

* * *

Another Mining Disaster

Seventeen miners died as a result of an explosion in a coal mine near Barnsley (Yorks.) on September 12th. There have now been three big mining disasters this year, all claiming a heavy toll of life. These tragedies emphasise the conditions of workers who, for a pittance of less than £2 per week, have to risk their lives. And we often have to answer questions like: "Do not the capitalists have to risk their money in order to make a profit?" The miners are now preparing to struggle for an increase in their wages. Whilst we commend such struggles, we must at the same time point out that such a struggle, even if successful, will only mean a few more shillings a week. And we ask you miners: "How can you be satisfied with that when, by organising into the S.P.G.B., you can help obtain the Means of Life, including the mines, for society as a whole." Then the risk to human life would be lessened and, in return for less arduous and unpleasant work, all the comforts of life would be yours.

* * *

A “ Corrective ” for Capitalism

"Capitalism is your servant and must never be your master—but it must be treated fairly. When it goes wrong, as it has gone wrong, it must be corrected." (Mr. Bennett, Canadian Premier, Daily Herald, September 13th, 1935.) We propose that the working class makes itself "master" of the political machine, and then administer one stroke—the appropriation of the land, factories, means of transport, etc., in the name of society.

* * *

“Men of Action ” at Work

The German "Men of Action," Hitler and Co., assembled at Nuremberg, where the German Reichstag was called to deal with problems alleged to be of vital importance to the German workers. General Goering presented the first Bill, which provides that the Swastika flag shall become the State flag of Germany. Thus a tremendous victory was won for the German working population! Further evidence of the Nazi Government's concern for the conditions of the German workers was shown by the following new laws (Daily Herald, September 16th): —
For the protection of the German blood and honour, this law forbids the marriage between Jews and Germans or related lines.

Jews cannot hire German maid's in their household under the age of 45.
The joy of German working people should be boundless. How different from Socialists, who are merely concerned with the solution of the problem of poverty!

* * *

Without Trimmings

The agenda of the Labour Party Conference, held at Brighton this month, contains several interesting items. A resolution submitted by the Southport Trades Council and Labour Party reads as follows: "That the next General Election be fought without trimmings, on the policy outlined at the Southport Conference, under the title of ‘For Socialism and Peace,' special stress being laid upon:—
  1. The immediate nationalisation of the land and all minerals.
  2. The immediate establishment of a 40-hour week, with no reduction in economic circumstances.
  3. The immediate raising of the school-leaving age to 15 years, with full maintenance during the last year at school.
  4. General retirement from industry at the age of 60, with pension, such pension to be raised to £1 per week for a single person and £2 per week for married couples.
“ It is urged that this general and specific policy be a ‘Stand or Fall' programme, and declares that it is the lowest minimum of policy as Socialists this Conference is prepared to tolerate.”

So now you can “stand or fall” for “Socialism and Peace” with or without “trimmings”—and get “trimmed". 

A further resolution submitted by the Warrington T.C. and L.P. reads as follows: —

“That this Conference, believing that there is a limit to the possibility of Social Reform legislation within the capitalist system, and realising definitely that the Labour Movement of this country has declared for a Socialist policy, agrees that the Movement should centre the whole of its propaganda and educational activities on making Socialism and Socialist Policy its only objective” 

”The Conference further declares that the concentration of the Party on the support of the policy of doles and palliatives has become inimical to its Socialist objective, and that the next Labour Government should set out immediately to adopt such Socialist measures as will render such doles and palliatives unnecessary.”

Everything depends upon what the people at Warrington mean by “Socialism” and "Socialist measures.” But if they mean to change the Labour Party from a reformist organisation to a Socialist one their task is hopeless. The bulk of the Labour Party membership is not Socialist, and the job of converting them cannot be done from within. And why trouble to change the Labour Party if there is already a party in existence whose only objective is Socialism, namely, the S.P.G.B.

Labour Party headquarters have shown what they think of the above resolutions by putting it at the tail-end of the agenda, under the heading of “Miscellaneous.”

* * *

S.P.G.B. and the B.B.C.

Last year we approached the B.B.C. with a view to obtaining permission to put our case over the radio. We received a polite letter, informing us that arrangements had already been made for a representative of “Left-Wing Socialism” to broadcast. As we are not “Left-Wing,” but Socialists, as, in fact, we belong to “no wing” of the Reformist Movement we repudiated the right of anyone to speak on our behalf, unless appointed by ourselves. Now we have again approached the B.B.C. and hope that these gentlemen will grant us the privilege that has not been denied to the other political organisations. If and when we get our turn we hope to be able to make it quite clear to the listeners that as the S.P.G.B. is the only party in this country that does not recruit support on questions of day-to-day legislation under capitalism but gets its backing solely on the issue of Socialism versus Capitalism, we have nothing in common with those who, calling themselves “Socialists,” are, in fact, nothing of the kind. Scientific, revolutionary Socialism in Great Britain is represented by the S.P.G.B.
Sid Rubin

Capitalism v. Socialism (1935)

From the October 1935 issue of the Socialist Standard
 
Trade Union official cites Russia!
There has lately come before us a copy of The General and Municipal "Workers' Journal (June, 1935). Reminiscent of a parish magazine, its pages contain so many incorrect statements and samples of loose thinking that it would take several issues of the Socialist Standard to deal with them individually. It may, however, be of interest to deal with the “Notes” of the General Secretary, Mr. Charles Dukes, especially those under the heading of “Capitalism v. Socialism.” The United States is quoted as an example of capitalism, whilst Russia is referred to as “Socialist Russia.” The General Secretary states that the disaster of capitalism in the United States is due to the fact that they have no policy for refunding their National debt, which has increased by nearly 12,000 million dollars as a result of the “New Deal” policy. The General Secretary should know, however, that national debts are not necessarily disliked by the capitalist class—who are the only people concerned; in fact, some of them like them so well, that there is at the moment a widespread newspaper campaign for expanding armaments by means of a £250,000,000 loan, instead of by means of taxation.

A national debt is nothing more than a sum of money owed by the capitalist class as a whole to that section of the capitalist class which invests its money in war loans and other government securities. The incomes of the whole class are taxed in order to pay the interest to that section. National debts, therefore, are no indication of disaster to the capitalist class.

His remarks on Socialism show that Mr. Dukes knows not what this is. Our own definition of Socialism will be found by reference to our object on the centre page of every issue of the Socialist Standard. As it is now fairly well known that the conditions in Russia do not correspond to this definition—in particular, the means of production are controlled, not democratically, but by the controllers of the Communist Party—it will be obvious that Socialism has not been established in Russia.

Again, as under Socialism goods would be produced solely for use, the necessity of the exchange medium—money—would disappear, yet the General Secretary refers to “money,” “income,” and “expense,” as part of the Russian “Socialist” economy. Another reason given for the “success” of “Socialist” Russia is, that she “does not seek the assistance of foreign loans.” Here, again, he is wrong. Instances of foreign loans negotiated by the Bolsheviks have been recorded previously, but the following is a case in point: —
BIG LOAN TO SOVIET.
Prague, Monday.
Soviet representatives to-day signed an agreement with Czecho-Slovakian banks for a loan of £2,083,000 for five years at six per cent, to finance purchases of Czech manufactures by Russia. —British United Press.
(News Chronicle, June 4th, 1935.)
As to the nature of the “success” itself, this would appear to consist of the fact that there are insufficient workers for the available jobs, and that output in the heavy industries has increased as compared with a year ago. And this is the “success” of “Socialism”! It is, of course, simply the conditions which are regarded as successful under capitalism.

The case for Socialism as against capitalism can be put both correctly and much more simply. Briefly it is that capitalism—a system of society based upon the private ownership of the means of production—produces certain unpleasant effects upon an enslaved class called workers, viz.: poverty and insecurity most of the time, and, by way of a change, unemployment and war. It is, therefore, in the interest of the workers to completely change the basis of a society which produces such effects. As the opposite of private ownership is common ownership. Socialists advocate the replacement of the existing form of society by one based upon this common ownership of the means of production and distribution, namely, Socialism. This result can, however, only be achieved by a class-conscious working class organised for that purpose. It is for that purpose that the Socialist Party of Great Britain was formed, and it is up to all workers who agree with our position to join with us and help on with the work. Now, fellow workers, what about it?
R. Milborne

Educational Classes (1935)

Party News from the October 1935 issue of the Socialist Standard



Blogger's Notes:
  • 'Stewart' was Stella Stewart, who is better known today as Stella Jackson, and who was the daughter of SPGB founding members, T. A. Jackson and Kitty Hawkins. By 1935, T. A. Jackson was a longstanding leading member of the Communist Party of Great Britain.
  • 'Hayden' was Harry Hayden. He joined the Battersea Branch of the SPGB in April 1932, and was a member of the Party until he resigned his membership in December 1959. He rejoined the Party in July 1975 and remained in the Party until his death in 1992. His obituary appeared in the September 1992 issue of the Socialist Standard.
  • 'L. Otway' was the husband of May Otway. Both joined Walthamstow Branch of the SPGB in October 1924. Whilst May Otway resigned her membership of the Party in April 1940, L. Otway was lapsed from Party membership in May 1942.
  • 'Reginald' was Augustus Snellgrove's pen-name/ party name.
  • 'E. W. Brightmore' , a former member of the Labour Party and the CPGB, was a member of Leyton Branch from 1933 until his membership was lapsed in 1936.
  • 'Goldberg' was David Goldberg. He joined the Hackney Branch of the SPGB in March 1925. He's mentioned in Barltrop's book, The Monument, as dying during World War Two. He was killed in action in Italy in 1945.

Notes by the Way: What Mussolini did for Italy (1935)

The Notes by the Way Column from the October 1935 issue of the Socialist Standard

What Mussolini did for Italy
 
Here is a brief description of the lofty principles on which the Fascist Government has trained its boys and young men, under the guise of “education."
There minds have been saturated with bellicose sentiments. The word Fatherland has lost for them its meaning, apparently obsolete, of love for the native land and its inhabitants, and has come to signify a proud and pugnacious attitude to the foreigner. While they were still boys the rifle and the machine-gun were put into their hands. All their Sundays were spent in military exercises. In their elementary school they were taught from a State text-book in which the martial virtues were exalted as the best virtues of a citizen. Indeed, later on they were taught that the citizen in Italy is from 6 to 60 a soldier, and that Italy, in the words of the chief of Fascism, must be a “military, militaristic, and warlike nation." (Times, September 5th.)

* * *
 
Capitalist Crisis and Capitalist War
 
Sir George Paish, in a letter to the Press, recently drew attention to an aspect of the Abyssinian conflict which has received little notice, that is the similarity between the condition of Italy now and in 1896, when also war was waged on Abyssinia.
"At that time the world was suffering from a severe economic and financial crisis, and the distress of Italy caused her statesmen to seek relief in a policy of conquest. The world to-day is suffering from a crisis more severe than 40 years ago, and Italy is in even greater distress than she was then. In consequence, Italy desires a colony to give her a market for her products, to which her people can emigrate, and from which she can obtain food, raw material, and gold .... economic and financial distress is the real cause of the difficulty.” (Times, August 31st.)
Here we have from a world-famed economist, who hopes and believes that capitalism can and should be saved, a fairly frank admission that capitalism is at the root of modern wars.

* * *
 
The Rate of Increase of Output in Industry
 
The rash speculations of Douglasites and others about a supposed vast and rapid increase of output in industry, due to the introduction of improved machinery and processes, have received additional refutation in a survey of output in the Economic Journal (September, 1935), by Ely Devons, of the Economic Research Section, Victoria University of Manchester. Basing his survey on the census of production and other material, he finds that the increase of output per head of the workers in all manufacturing industry in this country increased by at least 14 per cent. in the six years from 1924 to 1930. He thinks the actual figure will be somewhat larger than 14 per cent. for reasons given in the article. Making a reasonable allowance for this, it will be seen that the increase per annum is rather less than 3 per cent.

Taking the smaller range of industries which are covered by the Board of Trade’s index of production he finds that the increase of output per head of the workers actually in work was 20 per cent., or a little more, in the nine years 1924—1933. This gain is well below 3 per cent. a year.

These estimates agree with others given in the Socialist Standard from time to time.

* * *
 
The Output in Mining and Iron and Steel
 
A writer in Forward (August 24th), who shares the misconception that productivity increases at a “tremendous” rate, gives figures relating to coal-mining, an industry in which a great deal of machinery has been introduced. He claims that after allowing for the big reduction in the total output of coal, for the decrease in the number of miners, and for the greater amount of short time, output per head has increased by 30.4 per cent. in the ten years 1923—1933. Even if this were the whole story the increase each year would still be less than 3 per cent. of the previous year's output. Actually, however, it leaves out of account any additional labour used up in the manufacture and maintenance, etc., of the machines, also the fact that, the output per head in 1923 represented a big decrease, as compared with 1913 (from 260 tons a year to 229 tons).
 
On the other hand, miners’ hours of work are shorter than before the War.
 
If these modifications are allowed for it will be seen that miners’ output per head now as compared with that in 1913 has increased at the outside by not much more than 2 per cent. a year. The rate of increase in recent years may have been somewhat larger, but much of this has merely made up for the previous decline in output due, among other causes, to the fact that coal becomes more difficult to get at as the mines become more worked out.
 
An estimate of the increase of productivity in engineering, shipbuilding and iron and steel, based on the index of output published by the Royal Economic Society, and on the number of workers actually at work in these trades, shows that output per head between 1924 and 1930 increased by about 3 per cent. a year.
 
* * *
 
Major Douglas puts his Cards on the Table

There is certainly one thing for which Major Douglas deserves praise, that is for his very definite statement of his attitude towards the Alberta Social Credit Government. He might, had he wished, have expressed vague and qualified approval without committing himself to anything definite. Instead, in an article in the Sunday Express, he stated in plain language exactly what he believes the Alberta experiment will produce. As we know that the application of the Douglas theories will fail to achieve the results Major Douglas anticipates, it is a suitable occasion to place on record what he wrote in the Sunday Express on September 1st, 1935. The following passages are extracted from the article in question:
Mr. Aberhart, the new Prime Minister, is a man of magnetic personality and a magnificent orator. In the heat of the election he went rather beyond any proposals that I have made, but it is entirely false to say that I am in disagreement with him, I admire him greatly (Italics ours.)

He promised during the election to pay every Albertan five pounds a month. I hope and believe that once his plans are in full operation that figure will be substantially increased.

If the credit of a rich province is made fully available to its people without artificial restrictions of any kind, there will be no poverty. Everyone will have enough to eat, a decent home, opportunities for recreation and adequate leisure.

That, I believe, will happen in Alberta if the new Government sticks to its policy. It will probably take fifteen months before the plan is in full operation, and that fifteen months will be a period of great difficulty and bitter strife. The vested interests of the bankers and financiers will not relinquish their monopoly without a hard struggle.

In 15 months from now, I believe that Alberta will be a blessed land. Unemployment will no longer be a menace to its citizens. No wheat will rot in its elevators. Fine new roads will enable tourists to appreciate its magnificent scenery and bring further wealth to its people.

It will become one of the show places of the world.
 
* * *
 
Capitalism and Superior Brains
 
Ousted from one position after another, defenders of capitalism finally fell back on the “superior brains." The capitalist, we are told, provides all the brain-power, the ideas, the organising skill and directive ability. His was the creative genius, without which the wage and salary earners would be floundering about in muddle and chaos.

The creative geniuses of capitalism finally produced the world war and the world crisis and, in passing, they turned whole counties of Great Britain into distressed areas, where idle men and idle mills rotted together. And what about the "superior brains" meanwhile? Having produced the chaotic conditions, are they setting to work to produce a remedy? By no means. Instead, the Chairman of the Whitehead Iron & Steel Co., Ltd., of Newport, Monmouth, is offering a prize of £1,000, with additional prizes of £200 for practical suggestions for “permanently and substantially reducing existing distress in South Wales and Monmouthshire (Daily Telegraph, August 31st).

You send your answers to the Industrial Development Council of South Wales. We know the answer, but we fear nobody will receive a prize for sending it in.
 
* * *
 
"200 Companies Own Half U.S."
 
Under the above heading the Star (August 3rd) publishes a report from Reuter's Agency, stating that, according to the American Bar Association, about 200 Corporations, managed by approximately 1,000 directors, own one-half of the wealth of the United States. These 200 corporations do not include banks.

“A small number of corporations exercise a dominant influence over price control and trade practices, and virtually control the production and distribution of the country,"  a report by the Association states.
Edgar Hardcastle

Answers to correspondents. (1935)

Letters to the Editors from the October 1935 issue of the Socialist Standard

“Use of New Logic” (Yarmouth.) We do not publish anonymous letters.
 
J. Cohen (E.3); F. S. Waterfield (N.); W. T. Raynor (Pinner). Replies held over.
Ed. Comm

Letter: Socialists and Russia (1935)

Letter to the Editors from the October 1935 issue of the Socialist Standard

Socialists and Russia

August 6th, 1936.
 
Dear Sir,—I was listening to your speaker at Finsbury Park on Sunday evening, August 4th, when he remarked that the Soviet Government had issued loans from 7 to 12½ per cent. profit to subscribers, and hinted that by inviting foreigners to invest they are acting just as State capitalists and that the workers are nothing more or less than wage slaves. May I point out that these loans are used for construction of Socialistic industries and that the bulk of Russian workers, numbering several millions, are subscribers towards the loans, knowing full well the .purpose to which the money is being put. The interest given is certainly an incentive, but it should be pointed out by your speaker that as these loans are spread over an enormous number of subscribers the profit accruing to an individual investor is very small and cannot exercise any influence. Also, the number of foreign investors is estimated at less than one per centum (1%) of the total.

The Bolshevists are practical realists and know full well the impossibility of abolishing wages at the present time. As a matter of fact, this is not so very important, but what is much more essentially valuable is that the ownership and control of the means of production and distribution is held firmly in the hands of the workers themselves. If this is not practical Socialism, what is? Can it be denied that the Bolsheviks took over a graveyard and have now progressed at an amazing rate? Can it be denied that the material well-being of the Russian workers is improving from year to year, and that, to my mind, is the acid test, whether they are wage-slaves or overcoming the conditions of wage-slavery that is inherent in private capitalism.

Your speaker boasted that he is upholding the truth. Therefore he should amplify statements that are likely to be misrepresented by mischievous and unscrupulous individuals.

I remain.
Yours faithfully,
H. Jackson.


Reply.
The principal issues raised by our correspondent are: (1) Whether the social system in Russia is Socialist or Capitalist; (2) Whether the bondholders are all small investors; (3) Whether industry is progressing, and (4) Whether the material conditions of the workers are improving.

For replies to the various points, our correspondent is referred to the pamphlet "The S.P.G.B. and Questions of the Day," and to the Socialist Standard, October, 1934.

Brief replies are also given below: —

(1) Socialists from Marx onwards are agreed that characteristic features of Socialism are the common ownership and democratic control of the means of production and distribution; the production of goods only for use, not for sale; the abolition of all forms of income from the ownership of property; the abolition of the system of wage-labour; and the consequent disappearance of privilege.

Are these things found in Russia to-day? Certainly not. The Communist clique which controls the State machine maintains control of Russian industry as rigid as the control of the British Government over the Post Office. Goods are produced for sale, and at a profit. Rent, interest and profit from the ownership of property, bonds, etc., is a normal and growing feature of economic life. As our correspondent admits, the Bolsheviks, so far from having abolished the system of wage-labour, “know full well the impossibility of abolishing wages at the present time.” Lastly, by various means, including the great and growing inequality of pay between the masses of workers and the high-salaried officials, privilege is enjoyed by a fortunate minority.

(2) It is true that the great majority of bondholders own only small amounts of bonds, but exactly the same plea is made in England and America by the defenders of capitalism. In Russia, although precise figures are not available, it is known that some of the bondholders own large or comparatively large amounts. But in any event, this is beside the point. Under Socialism there will be no investors.

(3) The S.P.G.B. has not questioned the claim that Russian industry (like industry in Japan, Turkey, and other countries) has expanded rapidly since the war.

(4) The S.P.G.B. has not denied that the standard of living has risen since the Bolshevists obtained power. That does not mean, however, that we accept all of the extravagant claims made by some Communists. Russia is a country in which rigid censorship and suppression of independent working-class organisation is the normal order of things. As, therefore, it is impossible to hear the unfettered expression of the opinion of the workers themselves, we must accept with caution the claims made by the Russian Government since that Government has the usual interest in presenting the facts in a favourable light.

In conclusion, we would ask our correspondent a question. Seeing that the Russian economic system is not Socialism because it lacks the essential features of Socialism, will he tell us by what name he would describe it other than the one used by our speaker, “ State capitalism.”
Ed. Comm.

How to get to Head Office (1935)

Party News from the October 1935 issue of the Socialist Standard

Great Dover Street is a turning out of Borough High Street, near Borough (Underground) Station. The station it on the line from Morden to Hampstead and Highgate, and lies between the Bank Station and Elephant and Castle.


Blogger's Note:
I include this wee snippet as a wee SPGB in-joke as Barltrop mentions in The Monument that some Party members were up in arms in at the time when the Party decided to move to Great Dover Street in South East London. It was considered by some as the backwoods of London.

Educational Visits (1935)

Party News from the October 1935 issue of the Socialist Standard

A capital start was made on September 7th with our series of Educational Visits. Comrade Kersley threw illuminating sidelights on art in relation to the Materialist Conception of History at the Tate Gallery. It is hoped to extend to more than the twenty auditors who listened to our comrade the benefit of his knowledge by means of a lantern lecture later on. Offers of loan of lantern to organiser. If successful, other Educational Visits will be also supplemented in the same way.


Blogger's Note:
More information and background on Ted Kersley is available via his obituary which appeared in the May 1976 issue of the Socialist Standard.

Socialist Party of Canada (1935)

From the October 1935 issue of the Socialist Standard 
 
Head Office and Headquarters of the Socialist Party in Canada, 194, Market Avenue, Winnipeg, Man.

Will all those interested in the development of a revolutionary Socialist Party, and desirous of obtaining further information, write to the official Secretary, F. Neale, 179, Bannatyne Avenue, Winnipeg, Man. 

Those requiring books or pamphlets on Socialism, or wish to subscribe to the Socialist Standard, official organ of the S.P. of G.B. (subscription rates, 75 cents a year), write to Literature Agent, c/o F. Neale, 179, Bannatyne Avenue, Winnipeg.

SPGB Meetings (1935)

Party News from the October 1935 issue of the Socialist Standard




Blogger's Note:
'Robertus' was the pen-name of Robert Reynolds.