A leader on leadership

 Starmer’s reaction to 8 members of his shadow government of capitalism resigning and a quarter of his MPs voting, against his advice, for a ceasefire (he wants the killings and destruction to continue) was;

“Leadership is about doing the right thing. That is the least the public deserves. And the least that leadership demands.”

But what on Earth does that mean? It has a certain rhetorical flourish but has sinister implications.

Everybody, not just leaders, should of course do the “right thing”. But who decides what is the right thing? Starmer, as a Leader, naturally thinks that a leader should and that this is what the public “deserves”. In other words, he considers that “the public” are incapable of deciding this but only leaders are; that they require leaders to tell them what is right. What arrogance!

It might be slightly less bad if he personally didn’t change his mind so often about what is the “right thing”. At one time he thought Corbyn was and that certain leftwing reform such as ending charity status for private schools were. Now he doesn’t. Even on Gaza he has changed his mind. Initially he thought it was the right thing that Israel should cut off water, fuel and electricity to Gaza. Then he said (but probably doesn’t believe) that it was the wrong thing.

The lesson of all this? We don’t need leaders to tell us what is right. In fact we don’t need leaders at all. Don’t follow them, just tell them to get lost. It’s the least leaders deserve and the least the public should demand.

Opting Out? Government says NO!

 

In September 2023 SOYMB posted ‘Huddled Masses Opting Out.’

‘In a supplication reminiscent of the entreaty at the base of the statue of liberty in New York harbour, the UK Work and Pensions Secretary appeals to those of the working class who, through no fault of their own, are unable to offer themselves up to full-time, long-term exploitation, to help reduce the financial burden of running this particular capitalist entity.

The MailOnline reports: ‘One million people on sickness benefits could be forced to start looking for jobs including thousands with mobility and anxiety problems as the Government gets set to slash billions from its welfare budget.

More: ‘Up to a million sickness and disability benefit claimants are to be ordered to seek work. Unveiled by Work and Pensions Secretary Mel Stride the blitz is aimed at slashing the £26billion welfare budget’.

https://socialismoryourmoneyback.blogspot.com/2023/09/huddled-masses-opting-out.html

Moving on to November, now comes the big stick.

‘BRITS on benefits who refuse to look for work risk losing their right to free NHS prescriptions, dental care and help with energy bills.

The move, set to be announced in next week's ,Autumn Statement forms part of Jeremy Hunt's major plan to crackdown on economic inactivity.’

Around nine million Brits of working age are currently unemployed.

On Wednesday Mr Hunt will unveil a £2.5bn “back to work plan” in an effort to bring the figure down. Fresh funds will help up to 1.1 million people find work. Under the scheme benefit recipients who don't look for jobs risk losing access to free NHS prescriptions, dental care, legal aid and energy bill support. And sick notes will be approved by civil servants instead of doctors in a trial where patients will be treated by therapists working for DWP.’ The Sun 17 November

https://www.thesun.co.uk/money/news-money/24767659/brits-will-lose-free-prescriptions-in-benefit-crackdown/

To anyone who thought the Labour Party represented the British working class:

‘Millions of out-of-work Brits are a “horrible, painful toll” on the public purse and are “dragging” down the economy, a top Starmer ally declared last night. (speaking at Labour Party Conference).

Whose economy?

Shadow Cabinet Minister Peter Kyle said: “There are 2.5million people that are just unknown to the economy for reasons that we don’t understand, and there’s no exercise to go find them.“There are 700,000 young people who are not in education, training or work. And that figure has been growing, not diminishing.”

The shadow science and tech secretary hit out: “All of these things are personal tragedies, but they’re also taking a horrible, painful toll on our economy.

“It is dragging our economy down. So we need to get cracking on it.” ‘

The Sun 8 October

https://www.thesun.co.uk/news/politics/24329382/

The Guardian has; 'Speaking on Thursday afternoon, Hunt said the government wanted to address the “rise in people who aren’t looking for work” to help grow the economy.

“These changes mean there’s help and support for everyone – but for those who refuse it, there are consequences too. Anyone choosing to coast on the hard work of taxpayers will lose their benefits.”

Confirming the plans for a benefits crackdown, the Treasury said it would be taking steps to strengthen the current universal credit sanctions regime to incentivise claimants to comply with their work-search requirements and move into a job.

Under the current system, claimants can be subjected to open-ended sanctions if certain requirements are not met, such as attending a meeting with a work coach. These sanctions can result in benefit deductions until a claimant re-complies.’

https://www.theguardian.com/uk-news/2023/nov/16/unemployed-benefits-in-jeremy-hunt-autumn-statement

From the Socialist Standard, April 2014; ‘The Times (15 January) reported that George Osborne was to tell a conference organised by the think tank Open Europe that ‘Europe will face further economic woes if it fails to cut welfare spending’:

‘As Angela Merkel has pointed out, Europe accounts for just over 7 per cent of the world’s population, 25 per cent of its economy and 50 per cent of global social welfare spending. We can’t go on like this.’

He didn’t explain why not, but the implication must be that, to compete on world markets against the products made in countries which spend less on welfare, Europe has to reduce its welfare spending towards their levels. In other words, a race to the bottom.

One dictionary definition of ‘welfare’ is:

‘1. good health, happiness, and prosperity. 2. the maintenance of persons in such a condition; money given for this purpose.’ (Oxford Reference Dictionary)

On this definition, Osborne was in effect saying that, due to competition on the world market, all countries are forced to reduce the ‘good health, happiness and prosperity’ of their population. What an indictment of capitalism! And what a confirmation of the futility of reformists’ attempts to make capitalism serve human welfare.

But is it true? One thing Osborne ignores is that ‘welfare spending’ is not motivated by a desire to improve human welfare but by a desire to improve the productivity of the workforce – a better educated, more healthy workforce feeling less insecure can produce more profits. This was in fact the capitalist rationale behind the introduction of the so-called Welfare State and why the drastic reduction of such spending to the levels in China or India which Osborne and Merkel seem to be proposing could prove to be counter-productive.

Osborne probably knows this and doesn’t regard such spending as an unnecessary burden that has to come out of taxes that ultimately fall on profits any more than he does military spending which also comes from this. For him, both will be part of the necessary costs of running capitalism. What he will be against is welfare for those who can’t or don’t work and so are useless from a profit-making point of view – the sick, the disabled, the mentally ill, the old, the unemployed and the unemployable. In short, the most vulnerable members of capitalist society.

The fact that welfare has become a dirty word for capitalism shows that it is not a system geared to improving human welfare. If it was, then as productivity increased (as it does slowly from year to year) more resources would be devoted to services and amenities that enhance the welfare of everyone. But this is not what happens. Far from it. The pressure is downwards not upwards.

The fact is that capitalism is a system geared to making profits and accumulating them as more and more profit-seeking capital. That’s the logic which is imposed on all countries through competition on the world market. In this sense Osborne and Merkel are right, but that’s a convincing reason to get rid of capitalism and to replace it with a system in which the welfare of all can and will be the priority. Which is only possible on the basis of the common ownership and democratic control of productive resources and the end of production for the market with a view to profit.’

https://www.worldsocialism.org/spgb/socialist-standard/2010s/2014/no-1316-april-2014/

The Sun is part of Murdoch’s News Corporation.

The United Kingdom is the world’s sixth largest economy.

Gaza - join the discussion.

Meeting today at 7.30 pm on Zoom

The meeting on German culture was postponed.

Instead there will be a discussion on the ongoing war in Gaza.

To join the meeting click https://zoom.us/j/7421974305

Turn off Capitalism not fridges.

 

The Joseph Rowntree Foundation have published a new report, Destitution in the UK 2023.

https://www.jrf.org.uk/report/destitution-uk-2023 (full report)

Socialism Or Your Money Back has many posts about JRF poverty reports.

Here’s one from 2009.

‘The Guardian has an article on new Joseph Rowntree Foundation report on UK poverty and the media and its findings that there isn't much popular concern over UK poverty and places much of the blame on the media, saying there is little appetite to address themes of poverty. In newspapers, the subject is "worthy, not newsworthy", and journalists found it was often "difficult to give poverty a focus, since it is ongoing and amorphous rather than a specific 'event'". In other words , to paraphrase the Bible , the poor are always with us
Why don't we have celebrities singing "Let them know it's Christmas time" to raise money for the 3 million or so children in this country living below the poverty line? Why is there no Bono or Bob Geldof marshalling the campaign to end child poverty? Why can't campaign groups rouse sufficient outrage to get the public marching on the streets.

"The voices of people with experience of poverty...are severely under-represented in media coverage," says the report. On television, there is a danger of poverty turning into a "spectator sport" that entrenches an "us and them" mentality, the report also warns.

"There is very little sympathetic portrayal of poor people. And people are looking for reassuring images, that things are OK, things are fair and that people at the bottom are there because it’s their fault and therefore we’ve all earned on merit our position." (Political commentator)

As a result of this information shortage, many doubt whether there is"real" poverty in the UK and are unconvinced by the concept of relative poverty – the measure by which the government measures deprivation here. The public is either "harshly judgmental" towards people living in poverty or views poverty and inequality as inevitable. The trend of judging individuals as creators of their own poverty seems to be increasing. Journalists quite often used stereotypical pictures and words to refer to people living in poverty. Public awareness of the extent and reality of UK poverty is limited. People often see it as the individual’s responsibility to get out of poverty because they are not aware of the obstacles to achieving this. However,those suffering from poverty and being in receipt of benefits are stigmatised, so people are reluctant to speak out.

While the nature of poverty is very different from 50 years ago in the UK and from absolute poverty in developing countries, not having what most people take for granted is what many find difficult. Perhaps the starkest examples are the cases of parents going without or falling into debt so their children can have what others have, or their children being bullied at school for not having the latest trend. This may not be the poverty of material destitution. But if the measure of a human being consists in the accumulation of material possessions to which he or she may claim then , by that token, we are demeaned. And, ultimately, it is in this devaluation of our human worth — not simply in the fact of material inequality but in the meaning this society attaches to it.

The JRF calls for a debate that goes beyond building awareness of poverty. This needs the presentation of narratives exploring the causes of poverty and inequality. Over the decades the answer to the cause of poverty has been staring all those NGOs and charities and researchers in the face . It is capitalism .

Are all reforms doomed to failure and do not really make a difference to workers’ lives? Of course not - there are many examples of ‘successful’ reforms in such fields as education, housing, child employment, conditions of work and social security. But while there has been some ‘successful’ reforms, none of them have ever done more than keep workers and their families in efficient working order and, while reforms have sometimes taken the edge off a problem, they have very rarely managed to remove that problem completely. There have been some marginal improvements, but the social problems that the reformers such as JRF have set out to deal with have generally not been solved - hence the need for an uncompromising socialist party to pursue revolutionary change.

Nobody would deny today that poverty exists in the UK as many JRF reports provide ample evidence of . But does it make sense to argue that because we don't have socialism yet , we should, in the meantime, fight for reforms to at least reduce the worst effects of poverty. This argument has been voiced by so many for so long that `in the meantime' has become forever. The time is long past and too many people have suffered, are suffering, and will continue suffering until we attack the cause itself.

There is one way, and one way only, to abolish poverty, and that is to establish a socialist society in which the tools of production will be commonly owned and administered by the population as a whole in their own interests. In such a world, not only poverty but all the social evils created by the profit system will be abolished.’

https://socialismoryourmoneyback.blogspot.com/2009/09/reporting-poverty.htm

Fourteen years on, ‘The Guardian has an article on new Joseph Rowntree Foundation report on UK poverty...’The more things change the more they stay the same?

Main Stream Media all seemed to find it headline worthy that people are having to try and save the costs of electricity by turning off their fridges and freezers. Unsurprisingly, they are capitalist supporters after all, the solution to the ills of capitalism were not propounded.

From the 2023 Guardian report ‘a government spokesman said, ‘A Department for Work and Pensions spokesperson said: “The cost of living payments have provided a significant financial boost to millions of households – just one part of the record £94bn support package we have provided to help with the rising cost of bills. This includes a 10.1% rise to benefits earlier this year, and we’re investing £3.5bn to help thousands into jobs – the best way to secure their financial security in the long term. Ultimately, the best way we can help families is to reduce inflation, and we’re sticking to our plan to halve it this year, taking the long-term decisions that will secure the country’s financial future.”

https://www.theguardian.com/business/2023/nov/14/millions-of-uk-households-forced-to-unplug-fridge-to-cope-with-rising-bills

The conclusion of the 2009 blog post is even more relevant than ever: There is one way, and one way only, to abolish poverty, and that is to establish a socialist society in which the tools of production will be commonly owned and administered by the population as a whole in their own interests. In such a world, not only poverty but all the social evils created by the profit system will be abolished.’

l

Socialist Sonnet No. 122

Appealing

 

An afternoon of snooker on TV,

With every frame winning followed by

A commercial break, adverts that try,

Through poignant entreaty, to persuade me

To pick up my phone or just send a text

And donate month on month, as if charities

Can correct all the gross disparities

Of capitalism. First, war zones, next

The homeless, food banks, then forced marriage

Of young girls, the latest famine, immense

Problems of diseases drugs costing pence

Could treat, chronic loneliness of old age.

Each and every one a worthy mission,

But none will cure the ills of competition.

 

D. A.

Leaders get lost!

Hamas doesn't represent Palestinians, President Sergio Mattarella said Friday. "It must be reiterated, in the Palestinians' interest, that Hams does not represent the Palestinian people," he said while meeting Uzbek President Shavkat Mirziyoyev in Tashkent. "What Hams did on October 7 slitting the throats of children, raping women, taking children and elderly people hostage, and marking the scenes of violence is an insult to humanity," the president added.

'..Hamas was a legitimate government, democratically elected a year before the violent events of 2007, getting 76 seats out of the 132-seat chamber. But not for Mohammed and many other residents of the strip, who throughout the years staged multiple protests against the Hamas government.   “Democracy was over soon after the elections. First of all, they expelled the officials of their rivals to make sure that another round of elections will never take place again and, secondly, in the process of doing so, they killed dozens of people, many of whom were civilians. They never had the right to act this way”  (Mid East Discourse, 10 June 2020)

Legitimate? It's criminal we the people keep electing the likes of Hamas,  Hitler & Trump, King & Queen Ortega, the fundamentalist Islamic Salvation Front, Turkey's ever power-hungry president Erdoğan, and Rodrigo Kill 'em All Duterte of the Philippines and his replacement the son of dictator Marcos!   Legitimate or not, maniacal or moderate, leaders get lost:  the Socialist revolution requires the conscious understanding and participation of the majority of the working class. 

Heil Trump?

 Presidential loser Hillary Clinton was slammed online Wednesday after once again lazily claiming that Donald Trump is like Hitler.    Clinton cackled along with the women on The View like a coven of witches, before turning her attention to Trump, who it seems still lives rent free inside her head.    “Hitler was duly elected, right?” Hillary declared, adding “And so all of a sudden, somebody with those tendencies, the dictatorial, the authoritarian tendencies would be like, ok, we’re gonna shut this down, we’re gonna throw these people in jail and they usually don’t telegraph that.”

Fascism was — and is – an authoritarian, nationalistic and anti-socialist political ideology that preaches the need for a strong state ruled by a single political party led by a charismatic leader. Hitler and the Nazis came to power with the support of more than ten million workers. Further, that very month, March 1933, the first camp was opened – for the incarceration of officials of the Communist and Social Democratic Parties. And on May 10 1933 in Berlin banned books were burnt openly and watched by some 70,000 people. Trump ticks those three ideological boxes and like Hitler was elected — his supporters include millions of workers, whilst millions of others are disenfranchised.

In April 2018 his administration began enforcing a zero-tolerance immigration policy that resulted in thousands of children being separated from their families.    Under Trump gas was used on migrants wishing to enter the US, an Obama-era policy,   What next? More camps in 2024 surrounded by ‘beautiful barbed wire’? Further, given that apparently Trump does not read books, and there is already a list of banned books, one wonders if he will object to them being burned …