Introduction to Socialism (1938)

From the September 1938 issue of the Socialist Standard

The object of the Socialist Party of Great Britain is stated on all the Party’s publications. It is a clearly defined object with no “ ifs ” or “ buts,” an object that determines and directs the activities of those who pursue it. It is not camouflaged by vague phrases, neither is it lost sight of amongst a number of objectives. It does not come up for amendment at the Party’s conferences; it stands as the one and only goal of Socialist organisation—with no side issues.

There are many of our fellow-workers, with a political interest which is seldom roused except at election times, who consider that our object is involved and difficult of comprehension, and that Socialism is far too complicated a proposition for them to understand. When we examine the elaborate schemes and detailed reforms which some other political parties, often calling themselves Socialist, offer as solutions to working-class problems, we are bound to claim that our object is the essence of simplicity.

As it appears in this issue of The Socialist Standard, and on our other literature, our object is stated as briefly as possible. In condensing it to a statement of 34 words we have had to use words and phrases which, in their political meaning, do not come within the vocabularies of some of our fellow workers. The propagandists of other political parties use these words and similar phrases in such a loose manner that their meaning is confused and misunderstood. The phrases “system of society” and “common ownership” are interpreted differently by different people, and the word "wealth” is frequently misunderstood as meaning just “money."

So, we will take the different phrases of our object and, as simply as we are able, we will analyse them in order to show their exact meaning and how really straightforward and simple our object actually is.

Assuming that the word ” establishment ’’ needs no defining, we will start with “ system of society.”

A society is not merely an aggregate of individuals, not just a collection of human beings. Such an aggregate or collection may constitute a crowd but not a society. It is necessary that there shall be some connecting link between the individuals, some relationship based upon something that is common to them all, before a society is constituted.

Human society in its early stages, when humans were but little different from the animals from which they had evolved, arose from the common need to combat the forces of nature and, to acquire food. It was a society of the simplest kind with a relationship between individuals arising from that common need. The need gives rise to the society, the manner in which the need is satisfied determines the nature of the relationships and these in turn determine the form of the social organisation. In primitive society the need was satisfied by the individuals each subscribing to the common fund, both in the matter of acquiring food and shelter and in defending the society from external forces. The relationships were simple ones, as was the social organisation.

Man differs from other animals by being a maker and user of tools. In the words of Faraday, “Man is a tool-using and tool-making animal.” As the tools that man makes and uses become improved and more complicated so human society develops from the simple to the more complex. With improvements in tools comes the division and subdivision of labour and the ownership of the tools by a section of the community, thus giving rise to the domination of man by man—slavery. At that stage the simple relationship of the common contributor to the common need gives place to the new relationship of slave and slave-owner, a relationship between men who, although members of one society, have conflicting interests.

To-day we have capitalism. The relations existing are manifold. The tools, now called machines, which, together with the land, the source of raw materials, we term the “means and instruments of production,” are still owned by a section of the community, the capitalist class. This ownership forms the basis out of which, arise the relationships of present-day capitalist society. Master and servant, employer and employed, debtor and creditor, buyer and seller, borrower and lender, robber and robbed, are a few to illustrate our meaning. Here lies the definition of our phrase, ”System of society.” The total of these relationships constitutes that system of society.

The object of the S.P.G.B. then, is to set up a society wherein there will prevail a certain set of relationships, different from the existing ones because the basis from which they arise will be different. What this new basis will be is stated in the latter part of the Party’s object—”based upon the common ownership and democratic control of the means and instruments for producing and distributing wealth.” In a future issue we will deal with other phrases, such as “Common ownership” and "Democratic control.”

The understanding of our object is necessary in order to interpret our attitude towards other political parties and to current world events. With the growth of that understanding amongst the workers the day of the achievement of our object draws near.

W. E. Waters