Tuesday, July 8, 2025

50 Years Ago: Forecasting (1964)

The 50 Years Ago column from the July 1964 issue of the Socialist Standard

Opposition at Socialist meetings often takes the form of asking for a detailed plan of Socialism, and on receiving the reply that none can be given, the opposer declares triumphantly that Socialism is impracticable.

Now, as a matter of fact, any forecast of the details of a future system of society will be vitiated by its being coloured by conceptions engendered by our present environment. As all our ideas are suggested by our material surroundings, past and present, we cannot mentally project ourselves into a form of society that has never yet been in existence.

Further, no detailed plan is necessary for the attainment of Socialism. We know that Capitalism was brought about by the revolution that destroyed the old society. Feudalism. Were the pioneers of that revolution, the men who fought the battle of the rising bourgeoisie against the feudal nobility, prepared with a plan of capitalist society? Had they in mind such details as wheat corners, massacres, and Liberator swindles ? No, it was sufficient for the purpose to wrest the political machinery out of the hands of the feudal nobility. The details of Capitalism have been settled by the capitalists themselves as they have arisen. Similarly, it is sufficient for the working class to capture the political machinery and to seize the means of production and distribution. The details of Socialist society will then be settled by the people as they arise. The broad basis of Socialism, viz., the common ownership of the means and instruments for producing and distributing wealth, and their democratic control by the people, is sufficient for the present.

[From 'A Common Objection Answered' by H. T. Edwards, Socialist Standard, July 1914.]

Branch News (1964)

Party News from the July 1964 issue of the Socialist Standard

Lewisham Branch is continuing its propaganda activity in Bromley and the Branch has especially asked that as many comrades as possible would be welcome to support their Thursday evening meetings at the Market Place, Bromley (outside Dunn's). These meetings commence at 7.30 p.m.

Glasgow Branch held a Seven Days for Socialism (June 6th-June 14th). Comrade Gilmac went up for the week to assist the Branch and we will have a review of the events in next month's issue.

Three weeks in America. Comrade McClatchie (Gilmac) reports: “I recently spent three weeks in America, most of the time in Boston, but I spent three days in New York. In Boston some members occupy Monday nights at their Head Office doing the routine work—dealing with correspondence, sending out literature, attending to subscriptions, etc. On Friday evenings there is an economic class and on Sundays they hold their fortnightly Executive Committee meetings. In between times Rab, Morrison and Fenton (the latter is also General Secretary) are engaged in writing and going through articles for the “W.S.” As far as I remember, the meetings on Boston Common had not recommenced. They have had very bad weather.

I attended an N.A.C. meeting and the Economics Class the first week I was there. At the second meeting of the Economics Class I spoke on the Materialist Conception of History. There was no time for advertising this meeting but about 80 letters were sent out to possible attenders. As a result about 30 turned up, and there were a number of questions.

I noticed one welcome change from my previous visit. A number of young people are interested and some have joined the Party.

Whilst in Boston I stayed, very pleasantly, at the Rabs. One evening they had a party which enabled me to meet some of the young people who have joined, and some who are interested. I also spent some pleasant evenings in the homes of Comrades Morrison, Ellenborgen, Blake and Gloss. One lovely evening Com. Gloss took me to dinner at a restaurant by the sea. Although his bookshop was burnt down he is carrying on quite well. I stayed with Comrade Orner and met the New York comrades. One of these (Charley David) was mentioned in a paper on account of his weekly discussions in a Square there. Another (Jack Kilgore) I was told, drives over one hundred miles to attend their Branch meetings in New York! In New York I had some lengthy discussions with Comrades Davis and Coombs. Another Comrade was there part of the time. Sam Orner is as full of beans as ever and proposes attending our next Conference. Charley Davis expressed the same intention. Comrade Fenton of Boston also proposes making a visit and Rab has it in mind.

In conclusion, I must record my appreciation for the comradely welcome I received everywhere. In particular, the warm and friendly atmosphere in the two places where I stayed; the Rab’s home in Boston and the Orner’s home in New Jersey. They could not do too much for me and for my comfort. I must add that Comrade Rab took me for a delightful three day trip through the New England States, which, to me, had an advantage historically as well as the appreciation of beautiful scenery and houses, villages and towns containing shadows of time gone by."

West London Branch have planned a visit to Brighton on Sunday, July 5th. This visit has been arranged in conjunction with the Brighton Group. All are welcome—meeting place—West Pier, Brighton, noon, Sunday, July 5th.

Wood Green & Hornsey Branch will meet in future at 17, Dorset Road, N.22, on Fridays at 8.30, All enquiries and correspondence to E. L. McKone at that address.
Phyllis Howard

SPGB Meetings (1964)

Party News from the July 1964 issue of the Socialist Standard






Chapter Four: Taxation— Dilemma & Deception (1984)

From Samuel Leight's book, The Futility of Reformism

Taxation is a dominating, reformist activity generating an inferred assumption that it possesses similar economic consequences for both the capitalist and working classes, varying only in degree. The socialist attitude contradicts this inference and asserts that the real burden of taxation is borne by the capitalist class, that the whole question has become a misleading, dangerous red herring diverting the working class away from their true interests. Our proposition may startle the uninitiated; however, we are dealing with a complex system of society, notorious for its deceptions, which invariably favor the rulers and not the ruled.

In order to properly evaluate the taxation process two essential factors must be properly understood: first, the value of labor power and how it is determined; second, the purpose of taxation and the related function of the state machine.

Wages represent the price of labor power and are determined by the cost of production of the worker. Members of the working class receive a sufficiency in the means of subsistence in order that mental and physical energies may be utilized during the working day. In addition, children must be raised, who will eventually become workers replacing those who have either died or gone into retirement, forced or otherwise. Wages attempt to cover the costs of food, clothing, shelter and the various amenities and necessities of life that are needed to maintain the worker and his family. The wages paid to the working class as a whole always approximate to a minimal amount related to their survival costs, adjusted on a continuous basis, through perpetual struggle, to a supposed cost of living figure. Labor power is therefore a commodity containing a use and exchange value, priced in the form of wages. Gross wages are subject to various deductions that result in a “take home pay.” This sum, however, does not indicate the true worth of the remuneration until the worker ventures into the market place to make purchases. “Real wages” are equal to the total sum of the various commodities that the worker is able to purchase with the net amount of money received. 

Under the taxation facade gross figures are stated from which tax deductions are made. The actual sum deducted as taxes also represents a portion of the gross wages—wages that in actuality the worker never receives except solely as a book-keeping item. This of course he “can’t eat,” but the euphoria created by the magical appearance of the figure and its swift demise is tantamount to a colossal deception and a cruel hoax. In reality, and most certainly over the longer term, it does not matter whether taxes are “high,” “low,” or even non-existent. The worker will eventually still only receive an amount equal to what is required for himself and his family’s maintenance. Laws, for example, could be enacted which at various times might eliminate taxes altogether; convey free rent, free transportation, and health and welfare subsidies. All these “benefits,” in the final show-down, would then be reflected in wages adjusted downwards in order to offset the illusory gains. This would not, of course, take place automatically, or immediately upon these measures being passed. The struggle over wages between the workers and their employers, through trade union action and by workers without organized representation, is a continuous one. Wage adjustments take into consideration allowances previously granted by an employing class well protected by efficient accountants and sophisticated managers. It should also be realized that any subsidies or services paid by governments out of taxes make the capitalist class a prime beneficiary, because without them the cost of living of the workers would increase and wages would consequently rise.

And so the paraphernalia of regular income tax deductions takes place together with an annual “settlement sheet” in the form of a Tax Return. The average worker gripes about “all the taxes” he has paid and fantasizes about how much better off he would be if he paid less taxes or if,perchance, he paid none at all. At this juncture, workers would do well to review past history where, for example, prior to World War II in the U.S., less than 5 million people paid federal income taxes. Similarly, large numbers of workers in England paid no taxes until after the war. All the multi-millions of these tax-free workers in by-gone eras endured a relentless poverty that was completely impervious to the tax-exempt status of the majority of the population. Poverty, both past and present, is basically unaffected by the taxation “levied” on the workers through a devious, intricate accounting system. The working class are not poverty- stricken because of taxation and their plight cannot be cured by tax adjustments. They are poor because they are property-less in the means of production and distribution—that is the crux of the problem!

The working class are led to believe that they are in fact making real, valid tax contributions which are going either directly or indirectly towards the support of “their country” and “their affairs” — a necessary evil, so to speak. The deception, instigated with superficial deductions and paper-work, has been impressively initiated, reality cunningly disguised. It matters little as to whether the ruling class and their representatives, either individually or collectively, are properly aware of the illusion created — this is beside the point. Obviously the majority of the capitalist class, like their dependent wage-slaves, are completely oblivious to the true nature of the system’s economics; possibly just a small minority are fully cognizant of all the ramifications of the tax scam.

From the aspect that all values produced in capitalist society are the result of the efforts of the working class alone, in this sense only workers produce all the wealth from which taxes are paid. Further, inasmuch as the tax forms legally designate the individual worker as the payer superficially, the workers nominally are paying taxes. But this is a graphic example of the deception of appearances. Taxes are payments which the capitalist class are forced to relinquish from the surplus values produced by the working class over and above the wages they receive, in order to pay for the various expenses needed to preserve the system’s survival and its administration. This is a necessary burden borne by the capitalist class and camouflaged by fancy form-filing and adroit misrepresentation.

Let us suppose that a worker earning a gross wage of $400.00 per week had taxes of $100.00 deducted, leaving him with a net take-home sum of $300.00 (for the purpose of this illustration, we are disregarding all other standard deductions). The capitalist is parting with $400.00 in an actual payment out of which $100.00 goes towards taxes under the name of the employee. Assume, hypothetically, that laws were changed so that the worker no longer was obligated to pay taxes but this item was shifted to the employer. Further, that at this particular time the total amount of taxes required by the Government in its effort to defray expenses remained the same and wage levels were unchanged. Both the monetary position of the capitalist and the worker would remain unaltered. The capitalist would still be paying out, over the long term, the $400.00 out of which a $100.00 would be allocated towards taxes at some future date; and the worker, you can rest assured, would still wind up receiving his $300.00. The only difference would be a transfer of the taxes credited to the employer’s name. Although wage levels and taxes do not operate with the rigidity that the foregoing example would imply, nevertheless the theory is sound based upon the determination of the value of wages and the formulation of surplus values produced by the working class over and above wages paid. From this surplus value the capitalist class derive their livelihood and are obligated to sacrifice a percentage, in the form of taxes, in order to protect their holdings.

The present arrangement is a clever camouflage, far superior to the example just given, that conveys an impression of higher wages being paid, with workers erroneously assuming that they are actively participating in affairs of state through their tax contributions. Incidentally, as an alternative to reducing wages it is far more subtle to “increase taxes.”

The working class are under the mistaken impression that they are joining with their employers on a somewhat comparable footing when they add their names and payments to the tax forms and - subsequently learn how the total national tax proceeds are allocated. Taxation is used for the upkeep of the state which covers a vast conglomeration of institutions, functions and services that exist to preserve and protect the capitalist system of society and the interests of the capitalist class—not those of the workers! The armed forces, police, judiciary, tax revenue departments, bureaucracies, welfare and social agencies, armaments, (euphemistically termed “defense”) are all part of the intricate state mechanism which is operating at all times for the protection of the status quo. The working class have had bestowed upon them, under the guise of taxation, the dubious honor of associating with their masters, on a superficial basis only, in the upkeep of a modern-day gargantuan monster—an instrument of economic oppression and an acknowledged legalized killer, with a potential for worldwide destruction.

For the capitalist class taxation is a never-ending dilemma, an irremovable thorn in their side, that demands national contributions of astronomical proportions to cover the overheads of the system. Although the burden is large, it nevertheless does not infringe upon their ownership rights, still allowing them to live in riches as compared to the poverty of the majority. The capitalist class, through their representatives, wage a constant battle amongst themselves as to which sections of their class should bear the various burdens of direct and indirect taxation. The merchants, real estate operators, manufacturers, bankers, for example, are lobbying continuously over tax matters, attempting to keep their own contributions as low as possible, and caring little should the costs fall upon their class compatriots. Truly a case of legalized robbers squabbling over the costs of the robbery! Much of the time and energies devoted by the main political parties revolve around tax issues; how collections should be accomplished, to what degree, in which areas, and a determination of expenditures.

Government spending receives its income via taxation or through the inflation of currency, which in its turn creates a general rise in prices. Governmental tax planners and reformists agonize over the theory that tax increases, which are obviously needed to defray budget deficits, will have a negative effect on business activity; that conversely a cut in taxes might act as a stimulant. The so-called policy, absurdly entitled Reaganomics, ironically put forward this approach which was previously espoused by their supposed political opposites,the Democratic Party during the late President Johnson’s administration. The U.S. national debt reached the mathematically incomprehensible figure of $1 Trillion in October, 1981 coupled with an ongoing Budget seemingly impossible to balance. Such facts are presented to the working class as if the problem was theirs and not their masters. Workers who spend the whole of their lives scrimping, saving, and as perennial debtors, who in most instances are unable to keep within their own paltry budget, are apparently expected to become concerned in the problems of the ruling class under the false premise that their interests are involved.

The national debt, significantly reported to be about 34 per cent of the Gross National Product, (i.e., the value of goods and services produced by American workers every year) is“underwritten” by the working class. Their physical and mental energies are the tangible resources that represents a labor force which makes feasible all the profits on the one hand while offering future “collateral” for the state’s indebtedness on the other.

The ramifications of taxation are so manifold that they provide a livelihood to armies of bureaucrats, accountants and tax attorneys. Each year new publications are printed which attempt to unravel and explain a veritable morass of tax laws. In fact, in order to strive for more simplification a U.S. Flat-Rate-Tax is now under consideration which, if adopted, would apply across the board the same percentage rate regardless of the amount of taxable income. The taxing of capital gains, short and long term, and estate taxes, are always being scrutinized and adjusted. The complexities are mind-boggling. The rich and super-rich establish protective trusts, use charities, plus a multitude of devices which, together with the nature — of the system itself, substantially protects their holdings both for themselves and their heirs. The tax payments never make the rich poor, nor the poor rich.

Members of the working class who own homes make property tax payments that go towards the upkeep of local governments, services and allied costs. However, a large proportion of this real estate is heavily mortgaged, with the consequence that in reality the Banks, Savings and Loan Associations and Insurance Companies own far greater equities in the properties than the actual tax payers. In effect, therefore, the workers’ payments in this instance is related to a creditor’s holding that is larger than their own. The funds are being used, just as they are with the Federal Government, to help maintain a system that exploits them. In any event, similar to the sales taxes that are added to commodity prices, in the overall picture these items are factors that are incorporated within the cost of production of the worker and the amount of wages received. This does not imply that wages can be expected at all times to satisfactorily and automatically cover all costs paid by the workers for their survival— far from it.We are dealing here with general economic positions that are subject to the effectiveness of the class struggle, from the working class standpoint, at any given period. Should taxes increase, or the cost of living goes up, without an immediate wage adjustment, then the worker’s situation is temporarily worsened. However, assuming that the workers continue their struggle to maintain and increase wages as conditions warrant and allow, it is the longer term outcome that becomes operative. Wages are adjusted on a continuing basis, related to the cost of living, the militancy of the workers, and the existing state of the capitalist economy.

The reformists will never cease in their efforts with tax matters. Taxation, however, is not a working class issue. Energies should be devoted to maintaining and increasing the net wages paid as general circumstances allow, with the understanding that this is in line with working class interests, while campaigning over taxation isa futile waste of time—a mythical non-issue. There is, in fact, only one issue—the establishment of socialism.

Military indoctrination for schoolkids (2025)

From the July 2025 issue of the Socialist Standard

A recent headline grabbed our attention: ‘Military gap years for teens and school lessons on defence to prepare UK for war’ (i paper, 2 June)

Amidst the war hysteria being ramped up by the governments of the UK, Germany and France, and by Brussels, our schoolchildren too are not being spared the fear-mongering.

‘Teaching’ them ‘defence’ and ‘respect’ for the killing forces of the capitalist state is not an education in any sense, but an indoctrination in fear and an unpardonable assault on young, impressionable minds. Whilst capitalism exists war is an ever-present reality which can only be removed when capitalism itself is abolished.

As for ‘teaching defence’, it is a repugnant falsehood to make people believe there is any defence to be had in the event of a nuclear war. The weapons defend nobody. They inflict mutual annihilation. There can be no life following such an exchange, let alone any desire to still be alive.

If the word obscenity was ever to be really defined, it is by the present British government’s imposition of war panic on the populace and on our children. Not to mention the psychologically and emotionally vulnerable. The taking away of livelihoods and the continual squeezing of the poorest in society is not, it seems, enough for the Starmerite government.

Every year, capitalism shows us just how low and how anti-life it can sink. It is this defunct and lethal system that needs to be abolished now before it abolishes life on our planet. Only the working class themselves, the vast majority, can and must abolish capitalism – the system of death.
A.W.

Hypocrisy about ‘rights’ (2025)

From the July 2025 issue of the Socialist Standard

The Equality and Human Rights Commission (EHRC) recently moved to secure a High Court injunction banning peaceful protest outside its Vauxhall offices. The aim was clear, to halt a Trans Kids Deserve Better protest encampment calling out the Commission’s anti-trans guidance. Instead, the court firmly rejected the move.

On 3 June 2025, Justice Sheldon dismissed the application, stating the EHRC’s landlord failed to prove a ‘strong probability’ of future trespass or encampment. Campaigners celebrated the decision:
‘Simon Natas of ITN Solicitors, representing campaigners, warned that such so-called “persons unknown” injunctions: “have become increasingly common … their impacts on freedoms of speech and assembly are far-reaching”’.
The EHRC’s website proclaims that ‘Article 11 protects your right to protest’. Now, as Good Law Project points out:
‘The EHRC was created to protect our rights. Now it’s trying to quash peaceful demonstrations.’ It’s hypocrisy laid bare.
This is arguably alarming given that the protest highlighted the EHRC’s recent interim guidance, issued hastily after the UK Supreme Court’s April ruling defining womanhood and EHRC Commissioner Akua Reindorf’s call for a ‘period of correction’ for trans people, believing they had ‘been misled for years’.

The backlash was immediate: the interim guidance prompted Labour to scrap its national women’s conference for the next two years and extend consultations, forcing the EHRC to delay updates to its code of practice.

Last month, ‘thousands’ rallied in London and Edinburgh to oppose the guidance. In Glasgow, activists scaled the EHRC building, displaying a banner reading ‘End Segregation, Trans Liberation’ — a direct challenge to its policies.

This affair lays bare a telling reality: the EHRC, ostensibly set up to be a rights champion, now resorts to court injunctions to silence criticism, specifically from the trans community. Claims of institutional independence crumble when it attempts to suppress dissent aimed directly at itself.

Rights under capitalism are conditional. The EHRC’s failed injunction is significant, not because it defends protest, but because it pushed legal limits on dissent and lost. Socialists can never trust courts or quangos. Genuine rights including freedom of assembly, equality, and dignity, rest only with mass collective working-class control. The EHRC’s attempt to ban protest is an attack on that principle. Fortunately, this time they failed.
A.T.

Vanguards, get lost (2025)

From the July 2025 issue of the Socialist Standard

Maybe it’s because our offices are situated there and it’s done to annoy or provoke us but the street furniture in Clapham High Street in South-West London is frequently the object of posters and stickers adorned with a hammer and sickle saying ‘Join the Communists’. Following the internet links given reveals they come from the ‘Revolutionary Communist Party’ and the ‘Communist Party of Great Britain (Marxist-Leninist)’. Recently they have been joined by a third, ‘Communist Vanguard’, apparently a split from the ‘Revolutionary Communist Group’.

All these, and perhaps up to 53 other varieties, claim to stand for an oxymoron they call ‘Marxism-Leninism’ and use the hammer and sickle as their logo. How oxymoronic they are can be seen by comparing what they say with what Marx and Engels wrote in 1848 in the Communist Manifesto:
‘All previous historical movements were movements of minorities, or in the interest of minorities. The proletarian movement is the self-conscious, independent movement of the immense majority, in the interest of the immense majority’.
This is how ‘Communist Vanguard’ introduces itself:
‘Our main task is to forge the future Communist Party, the revolutionary vanguard of the working class and the only organisation capable of leading the fight to destroy capitalism. For a Marxist-Leninist organisation, building the Party is inseparable from organising the working class. Only the proletariat, as the gravedigger of capitalism, possesses both the objective interest and the collective power to carry out a revolutionary transformation of society. To guide this process, we aim to create communist cadres capable of weaponising their theoretical understanding of capitalism and scientific socialism, clarifying central political questions for the working-class movement, establishing roots in labour organisations, and developing the theoretical and practical foundations necessary for revolutionary transformation.’
Pure Leninism: workers, incapable of organising themselves to overthrow capitalism, need a vanguard and its cadres (‘a small group of trained people who form the basic unit of a military, political, or business organisation’) to lead and guide them in this.

So it’s ‘the self-conscious, independent movement of the immense majority, in the interest of the immense majority’ (Marx) versus ‘the revolutionary vanguard … the only organisation capable of leading the working class … To guide this process … communist cadres…’ (Lenin).

The contrast could not be starker and explains why ‘Marxism-Leninism’ is as much an oxymoron as a ‘square circle’.

The hammer and sickle was the logo of the Bolshevik Party which seized power in Russia in November 1917. This was a typical historical minority movement and led not to socialism but to state capitalism with the section of the cadres who won the internecine struggle that followed Lenin’s death in 1924 emerging as the new, privileged ruling class.

Capitalism wasn’t overthrown in Russia in 1917. It couldn’t have been as, in the absence of a world socialist revolution, it was ripe only for the further development of capitalism. How economically backward Russia was then was reflected in the Bolsheviks’ logo of a hammer to beat metal and a sickle to cut wheat.

It is difficult to see why the rival vanguards think that an ideology and logo that emerged over a hundred years ago in an economically backward part of the world could be attractive for workers today living in an advanced capitalist economy. Both ideology and logo are completely irrelevant.

The vanguards evidently have a high opinion of themselves to appoint themselves the leaders of the working class. The workers need them like they need a hole in the head. The answer of the working class to this arrogant pretension is simple: get lost.

Who are the ‘People’? (2025)

From the July 2025 issue of the Socialist Standard

The People, n. with def. article: a term that arose with the war of independence of American property-owners from the British crown and which came into general international use with the bourgeois revolution in France, where it referred to the ‘Third Estate’ – a general term for those neither of noble nor ecclesiastical aristocracy, but applying specifically to the revolutionary bourgeoisie, or capitalist (middle) class, as applied to themselves.

‘The People’ was therefore a capitalist term and indicated that class’s political and economic interest. It was mistakenly adopted by the nascent French working class of the French Revolutionary period, in ignorance of the fact that it was their masters’ watchword. It is still used today by non-class conscious members of the working class, and also by the representatives of capital desiring to blur the class struggle and keep the workers believing we share one entity with our exploiters, ie ‘The People’ of Britain, ‘The People’ of the United States, ‘The People’ of China, of Ukraine, of Russia, of Japan, of France, etc.

The People does not exist. There are two classes under present conditions: the capitalist minority and the working class majority. Each of us belongs to one or the other.

Only with the expropriation of the capitalist class by the working class will people come into existence, the people of Earth, no more under nation-states, but a real humanity.
A.W.

Kings & Queens (2025)

Book Review from the July 2025 issue of the Socialist Standard

Unruly: A History of England’s Kings and Queens. By David Mitchell, Penguin, 2024

1066 And All That, published in book form in 1930, was a parody on how English history was taught in schools. One of the targets was a history of England as a record of kings and queens, their years of reign and their battles and wars. After the Second World War there was a concerted criticism of this approach from historians — EP Thompson in particular — who argued for a ‘history from below’. One consequence of this criticism was the creation of the GCSE history syllabus in the 1980s. This changed the emphasis from memorising the dates of kings and queens to ‘key skills’ such as empathy. Empathy was an attempt to encourage schoolchildren to imaginatively experience what it was like to live as others lived, such as being a child worker in the cotton factories of mid-nineteenth century Britain. It was controversial, didn’t last long, and the emphasis has shifted back in the other direction.

David Mitchell is a comedian, writer and actor. He has no use for empathy in the study of history. He claims that ‘it’s impossible for a child … to get their head round how different the lives of the people they’re trying to empathise with actually were’. No evidence is offered for ‘impossible’, not even an amusing anecdote of the sort which peppers this book. ‘I’m better with dates, to be honest’, he admits. Mitchell went to a private school, so he might not have done GCSE history. In a book with plenty of autobiographical detail, it’s curious that he doesn’t mention it. So what you do get are a lot of monarchs with a lot of dates and absolutely no history from below. ‘It’s like a soap opera,’ writes Mitchell, ‘It never fucking ends’. He doesn’t refer to Alan Bennett’s The History Boys, but Bennett has a student complaining that history is ‘one fucking thing after another’. This is what can happen when the subject matter lacks context.

If you are after the historical facts, there’s nothing here you can’t get from Wikipedia or Google. Apart from the jokes and one-liners such as his summary of Henry VIII — ‘He was a cunt’, there are some interesting factoids. For instance, according to the Domesday Book of 1086, ten percent of the population of England were slaves. By around 1200, after the Norman invasion, there weren’t any.
Lew Higgins

SPGB July Events (2025)

Party News from the July 2025 issue of the Socialist Standard



Our general discussion meetings are held on Zoom. To connect to a meeting, enter https://zoom.us/wc/join/7421974305 in your browser. Then follow instructions on screen and wait to be admitted to the meeting.

Tiny Tips (2025)

The Tiny Tips column from the July 2025 issue of the Socialist Standard

The watch is a limited edition of only 150 pieces that’s already being delivered to customers. The retail price is $330,000…prices on the secondary market will get a bit bonkers. 


Pakistan’s claims to all of Kashmir are driven by the region’s hydrological importance, its majority-Muslim population, and the military’s interest in rallying the nation behind it on these grounds. 


‘That’s where I sleep, under that bridge’ he says, pointing to a nearby cluster of tents beneath a highway overpass. ‘And the dogs are up there with their own private pool. They probably eat more in a day than we do in a month’. 


Underage workers, in some cases, have been hired to kill poultry flocks, handle dead carcasses and clean industrial poultry farms. Workers sometimes lack personal protective equipment or receive damaged gear, despite the risk of the virus jumping from animals to people. Dealing with a federal backlog, some farms have used killing methods considered inhumane, because it can be quicker and cheaper. ‘The biggest factor in agricultural safety is the urgency’ said Bethany Alcauter, director of research and public health for the National Center for Farmworker Health, a Texas-based nonprofit that advocates for worker safety and health. ‘Everything has to get done in a short amount of time, and that really can be problematic because there’s not the same amount of time to adequately train workers’.


‘Trump’s view of a man at a desk moving pieces of the economy around like rooks and pawns on a chessboard is what socialism is all about—though the old tyrants in Moscow at least had the humility to assume that a committee of experts would be necessary to manage the economy according to ‘scientific‘ principles or at least the guile to pretend that they believed it, whereas Trump apparently has swallowed his own silly god-man horsepucky, being, as he is, an ass of exceptional asininity’. 


On July 28, 2024, Venezuelans turned out to vote in large numbers despite more than a decade of systematic repression and human rights violations under President Nicolás Maduro. Hours after polls closed, the Electoral Council declared that Maduro had been re-elected, with over 51 percent of the vote. The United Nations Electoral Technical Team and the Carter Center, which observed the elections, said the process lacked transparency and integrity, and questioned the declared result. The Carter Center said that the precinct-level tally sheets published by the opposition, which seemed to indicate that opposition candidate Edmundo González had won, were reliable and ‘authentic’. The Electoral Council failed to release the official tally sheets and did not conduct the required audits or citizen verification processes mandated by law. Thousands of protesters took to the streets in demonstrations, most of them peaceful, demanding a transparent and fair counting of the votes. They were met with brutal repression.


(These links are provided for information and don’t necessarily represent our point of view.)

Halo, Halo! (2025)

The Halo Halo Column from the July 2025 issue of the Socialist Standard

Which, in the long term, is going to damage a child’s mind more – the Brothers Grimm fairy tales or the fairy tales implanted from the various so-called holy books of various religions? Ignatius Loyola, said, give me a child for the first seven years of their life and I’ll give you the adult. Why? – to imbue the nonsense that is religion into susceptible minds so that when children become adults they will continue to unquestionably mindlessly spout ‘religion good, atheism bad’.

The imposition upon young minds of the indoctrination from propaganda sources which use colourful pictures redolent of those used in their media by jehovah witlesses pales into insignificance when compared to the actual physical abuse forced upon the very young by some religions.

In May the Washington Jewish Week was outraged against Belgium that it should be apparently mounting a ‘vicious attack’ upon ‘religious freedom’. The report says that Belgium police raided two mohels. A mohel is an individual practised in the religious ‘art’ of cutting of a male infant’s foreskin at the age of eight days.
‘There is no benign interpretation of these events. Armed officers descending upon religious leaders’ homes under the pretence of legal inquiry is the stuff of authoritarian regimes, not democratic Europe. The confiscation of ritual instruments used for one of the oldest and most central commandments in Judaism — brit milah, the covenant of circumcision — is to desecrate more than property. It is to trample upon the millennia-old continuity of Jewish life and identity. The demand that mohels surrender the names of children they have circumcised is especially alarming. It represents not only a grotesque invasion of privacy but a potential threat to those families’ security. Why do the authorities need those names? What database will they enter? What precedent does this set for religious communities across Europe? When religious practice is policed under suspicion, it is not law enforcement — it is persecution.’
The article then moves on to attack Belgium for its stance on animal welfare. Belgium has banned kosher and halal slaughter because the methods used inflict unnecessary suffering.

More article shocked outrage voice: ‘Now, it has targeted brit milah — a core Jewish ritual dating back to Abraham. Such orchestrated anti-religion action by the state is wholly unacceptable’

One can hear them channelling GretaThunberg, how dare you!

In the UK two men, from the other religion that does this have been convicted of ‘serious crimes related to non-therapeutic male circumcision (NTMC) of children…NTMC is an irreversible surgical procedure, which is medically unnecessary by definition, believed to be performed on thousands of UK children annually.’

Let us not forget the thousands of girls who undergo FGM (Female Genital Mutilation).

Meanwhile In Pakistan the Council of Islamic Ideology is peeved because a federal territory passed a bill outlawing marriage to anyone under eighteen. The peevishness is demonstrated by the Council’s response which said that ‘the legislation’s provision to define underage marriage as rape and impose punishments contradicted Islamic teachings.’ and is ‘contrary to Sharia.’
DC

How Labour governed (2025)

From the July 2025 issue of the Socialist Standard

Eighty years ago this month, the Labour Party won a landslide victory in the General Election held on 5 July 1945. Clement Attlee became the Prime Minister of the first Labour government to have had a parliamentary majority.

Labour hadn’t fought the election on a socialist programme, but its manifesto did declare — in words that would cause ministers in the present Labour government to throw up their hands in horror — that ‘The Labour Party is a Socialist Party, and proud of it. Its ultimate purpose at home is the establishment of the Socialist Commonwealth of Great Britain’. By ‘socialism’ was meant the nationalisation of the ‘commanding heights’ of the economy — coal, steel, railways, electricity, gas, and water.

On this they were as good as their word. The coal mines, the steel plants, the railways and the utilities were nationalised, as was the Bank of England. The previous owners were given generous compensation, with the shares they had held being transformed into interest-bearing bonds. The workers in these industries remained wage-workers and the interest paid to the bond-holders came out of the surplus value they produced. This was state capitalism, not socialism.

That the Attlee government governed in the interest of the working class is a myth.

It did establish the National Health Service with free treatment and free prescriptions. Although this was introduced in the capitalist interest to provide a fit workforce, it would be churlish not to recognise that not having to pay for medical treatment and medicines was of benefit to workers. Other measures that could be so regarded were the repeal of the anti-trade union laws introduced after the capitalist class victory in the 1926 General Strike, and a democratisation of the franchise.

But it was still a government of capitalism and, as capitalism cannot run in the interests of the working class, the Attlee government inevitably came into conflict with the workers. A leaflet we distributed in a local election in Northern Ireland in 1963 recalled a number of the actions it took as ‘part of Labour’s black record when it waged war against the workers in the interests of British capitalism between the years 1945 and 1951’:
(1) Used CONSCRIPT TROOPS to BREAK strikes.

(2) Imposed a ‘PAY PAUSE’ and ‘INDUSTRIAL CONSCRIPTION’.

(3) Used (in peace time) a wartime Order, 1305, in an effort to have striking trade unionists JAILED.

(4) Had workers RESISTING BLACK-LEG LABOUR sentenced to IMPRISONMENT and FINES under old PROPERTY-PROTECTION ACTS of 1875.
The Attlee government itself first introduced charges for some health services. It also developed the atomic bomb.

It is not just the present Labour government that is governing in the interest of the capitalist class. The Attlee government, despite its socialist pretensions, had to as well since that is what has to happen if you take on responsibility for running the political side of capitalism. You have to apply its economic laws that prioritise profit-making. It doesn’t matter how able, sincere or sympathetic you might be. Capitalism simply cannot be run in the interest of the working class.


Blogger's Note:
The July 2015 issue of the Socialist Standard carried a number of pieces on, what was then, the seventieth anniversary of the 1945 Labour Government. Articles included:

50 Years Ago: Benn’s road for capitalism (2025)

The 50 Years Ago column from the July 2025 issue of the Socialist Standard

In the run-up to last month’s referendum the man who excited most attention was Anthony Benn. The comments on his prophecies of doom and gloom ranged from stabs in the back from his own colleagues such as Roy Jenkins who said he couldn’t take Benn seriously as an economic minister (Guardian 28th May) to near-hysteria. For example the Daily Mirror (29th May) gave him the Draculean headline of “Minister of Fear”. An “X” certificate will no doubt follow.

The Guardian took the trouble to interview Dracula himself (21st May). The article was headed “Benn’s road to Socialism”. Benn did not define what he meant by Socialism (no Labour politician will do that), he only mentioned the word once. That was almost by accident when he referred to his package of reforms as “British Socialism”.

What concerns Benn is the running of Capitalism. And for those who care to look, it is perfectly obvious that he is determined to run it as efficiently as possible. This means that he is trying to ensure that the workers are exploited as hard as possible — because that is what efficient Capitalism means.

The source of the wealth of the owning class is the amount of unpaid labour that the working class concede to the capitalist class. This may be called robbery. Benn says “I am for more profits…” That is more wealth to the capitalist class. (…)

The rationale behind Benn’s approach is that he can control capitalism by putting into effect his policies. But he plainly admits that it is capitalism that controls the government, and not the other way round. Asked about the best way to use the taxpayers’ money he says:
“The government does not dictate the pace of industrial change. It is forced by events to inter-act with reality”.
Wilson once said the last Labour government was “blown off course”. Benn is saying that there is no course to be blown off in the first place. Capitalism acts, and the government reacts.

[From 'Benn's Road for Capitalism' by Ronnie Warrington, Socialist Standard, July 1975]

Action Replay: Only funding (2025)

The Action Replay column from the July 2025 issue of the Socialist Standard

Governments support capitalism and its ruling class in various ways, such as the police, courts and prisons. They fund transport superstructure and technological research. In addition, among other things, they provide financial support for sport as a way of boosting national ‘pride’ and patriotic fervour.

At the 1996 Summer Olympics, the British team fared very badly, winning a solitary gold medal. Not good enough, in terms of inspiring interest in the national team and endorsing flag-waving. The response was the establishment the following year of UK Sport, a government agency that invests money in Olympic and Paralympic sports. The funding comes from the government and the National Lottery, about £370m over the four-year cycle of the Olympics and Paralympics.

That may sound like a lot of money, but at the level of individual athletes it is a lot less generous. Recently the canoeist Kurts Adams Rozentals was suspended from competing by Paddle UK, the governing body. They have not said why, but he reckons it is because of his posts on OnlyFans, a social media site that hosts adult content.

Rozentals has earned over £100,000 from his posts there, which contrasts with the meagre £16,000 he was getting from UK Sport via Paddle UK. He simply couldn’t get by on that, and so started his OnlyFans site, saying, ‘I came to the realisation about why I started doing this last winter after years of struggle, years of living on the edge, my mum working 90 hours-a-week, having bailiffs at the door’ (BBC online, 29 May).

Some sports of course do better than others in terms of funding, such as over £20m for athletics in 2025–9, but just £700,000 for baseball, which doesn’t have anywhere near the same public appeal. The current focus is on the Los Angeles Games in 2028. According to UK Sport’s website, ‘Olympic and Paralympic sport occupies a special place in the hearts of the British public with more than 80% saying they were proud of Team GB and ParalympicsGB’s performances at Paris 2024.’

Besides individual athletes and sports, the organisation also supports particular sporting events and championships, such as this year’s Women’s Rugby Union World Cup, to be played at a variety of stadiums in England in August and September, which also has official sponsors too.

Other countries vary in how Olympic and Paralympic sports are funded. In the US it is largely private funding, including sponsors and commercial partners. Earlier this year the ‘philanthropist’ Ross Stevens made a $100m donation to the US Olympic Committee; he is the boss of an asset management company, so a wealthy capitalist. The Chinese government has a substantial sport budget, over £2bn a year, mainly for Olympic and Paralympic programmes.

Whether the money comes from the government or direct from capitalists, it is clear that funding for sport is an important part of boosting nationalism and loyalty to ‘one’s country’.
Paul Bennett