The Socialist Forum: Parliament and the Bankers
A Belfast reader asks the following questions : —
(1) Do the bankers or Parliament rule, and is Parliament a tool of the former?
Do the bankers dictate the economic, financial and, for the most part, the political programme Parliament must carry out?
(2) Did the bankers engineer the “crisis” during the autumn of 1931 and compel England to abandon the gold standard and also order a general election to take place?
(3) Could you point out some of Capitalism’s contradictions ?
(1) The Government is dependent for its existence on having the support of a majority in the House of Commons. The M.P.’s are elected by the voters, the great majority of whom are workers. The bankers, like any other section of the population, can only get their interests protected if they can get Parliament to approve.
The property rights and profits of the bankers are protected by law, just as are the property rights and profits of other sections of the capitalist class. Sometimes Governments lean towards one section of the capitalists (e.g., the bankers) and sometimes towards other sections (e.g., industrial capitalists). This they do either because of some urgent problem requiring treatment for the safety of the capitalist system, or in response to pressure from the M.P.’s and the political parties. The last Conservative Government by its rating reforms helped some industrial capitalists at the expense of other capitalists. The present Government has introduced tariffs with the same object. The return to the gold standard in 1925 was of benefit to bankers and to other sections of the capitalists.
That the bankers are able to secure protection by law and by the Government, is due to the fact that the electors approve. At the last election the “National” parties proclaimed that they were protecting the banks against supposed danger which would threaten if the Labour Party gained office. This did not prevent the majority of the workers from voting for the “National” candidates.
The bankers and other sections of the capitalists, of course, do not state openly that they are seeking protection for their own particular interests. They argue that what they seek is in the interest of the nation as a whole, and especially of the workers. While the workers lack knowledge of Socialism they will continue to accept this plea and vote into power people and parties favourable to the retention of capitalism in general and more favourable to the particular interests of bankers at one time and industrial capitalists, etc., at another.
Our correspondent should notice what happened at the recent by-election in St. Marylebone. There were two rival Conservative candidates in the field. One of them, Sir Basil Blackett, is a director of the Bank of England and had the backing of most of the Conservative leaders and the party machine. Yet he was beaten by the opposing Conservative candidate who had the backing of the rank and file of the local Conservative Party. The electors decided the issue.
(2) With regard to the question as to whether the bankers engineered the “crisis” of last autumn, we can only say that it is for those who hold that view to bring forward evidence in support. On the face of it the suggestion appears improbable, since the abandonment of the gold standard is hardly likely to have been sought by the bankers who favoured the return to gold in 1925. Our correspondent is referred to the articles published in several issues of THE SOCIALIST STANDARD from September onwards, dealing with various aspects of the “crisis.”
(3) The following are some of the contradictions of capitalism.
The existence of great wealth and great poverty side by side.
The existence of unemployment among workers needing the products of industry and willing to produce them, while at the same time the raw materials are lying unused and the factories idle.
Compulsory idleness among unemployed and enforced overwork among the employed workers.
The utilisation of labour-saving machinery not for the benefit of the users of them, but for the benefit of the capitalists, often accompanied by still greater strain on the workers.
The glorification of the leisured class and the simultaneous denunciation of idleness among the workers.
The prohibition of theft by Governments which use armed forces for wholesale robbery from other nations.
Ed. Comm.