Jottings
The following is an extract from a letter which appeared in the “Labour Leader” (7.4.11) from Sam Hague (I.L.P.) :
“It is certainly high time that we Socialists began to discuss what we mean by Socialism. . . . When I speak of Socialism I don’t mean what the man in the street means, I mean what the I.L.P. means as stated in its Constitution, i.e., Nationalisation of the Means of Production, Distribution and Exchange. I quite realise that grades and differences would exist in such a system ; that wages and salaries would operate ; that there would be governed and governors, etc.”
It has been pointed out in these columns again and again that the I.L.P. does not understand Socialism, and this admission by one of its leading lights lends support to our contention. Is it necessary to reiterate that nationalisation is not Socialism ? In fact the programme of the I.L.P. is such that the reforms advocated therein could be put into operation by any “progressive” government without jeopardising the position of the master class. The reason is that the programme does not touch the real position of the workers. The system outlined by the writer quoted could only operate under a capitalist regime.
A system of society based upon the common ownership and control of the means of life can only be established by a class-conscious proletariat. As the I.L.P., on its own showing, does not grasp the meaning of the class struggle, it follows that its conception of what constitutes Socialism is fundamentally wrong, and as such is therefore useless to the working class. On the other hand, the S.P.G.B., based as it is upon a clear conception of the scientific principles taught by Marx and Engels, recognises that the worker must bring about his own emancipation by class-conscious political action.
At the Annual meeting of the West Kent Federation of Free Churches held at Rochester at the beginning of March, Rev. F. B. Meyer spoke on the question of Socialism and Religion. “The Church of God,” he said, “had got to register God’s ideals on the Statute Book of our country and see they are carried out. . . . Let the Socialist say what he liked, but Socialism, however much truth there might be in it, was not going to save the situation apart from the Church, which regenerated the soul.”
What are the ideals of God ? Simply the ideals of the Church—the ideals of man. In other words the Rev. F. B. Meyer means that he would force upon the people by legal enactment the observance of the superstitious creed that he and others believe. Such a proposition is evidence of its weakness. The very fact of its failure after nearly 2,000 years proves its worthlessness, and no intelligent person accepts its teaching to-day—except, of course, the class of people who use it as a means of chloroforming the working class. Religion and capitalism go hand in hand. The one is necessary to the other. Both have used all the means at their command to keep the workers in subjection. To the Socialist the history of the working class is the history of slavery, for which the Church has always stood. From all this there is but one means of escape—Socialism.
Socialism does not claim to regenerate the soul, but it will regenerate Humanity without regard to race or sex. Our guide is science, not superstition; our test-rod is Reason, not Religion.
In deference to the wishes of the Mid-Rhondda Free Church Council the Rhondda District Council recently decided to forbid boxing exhibitions taking place at the Old Hippodrome, Tonypandy. The Council also decided to close theatres, cinematograph shows, etc., on Sundays.
The Church Council in question did not, I understand, also ask that exhibitions of brutality and force on the part of the representatives of the master class be prohibited. Oh dear, no ! Quite a different thing altogether. Boxing exhibitions, moving picture shows, and so on, were to them far more degrading and brutalising than the spectacle of armed bullies trampling men, women, and children under foot. The fact is, these “brimstone burners” hate any form of human enjoyment. They hate bands in the parks on Sundays ; they hate the theatre ; they hate roller-skating ; they hate dancing ; they hate Socialism ;
in short, they hate anything that keeps the people away from church and hence out of their clutches. If they had their way there would be no form of Sunday enjoyment except prayer, dropping money into contribution boxes, listening to sermons, reading the cheerful and spicy histories of the Old Testament, and meditating on the elevating theme of the joys of heaven and the torments of hell !
Such is the Nonconformist Conscience.
TOM SALA