Log in

View Full Version : the Socialist alternative - the price of war



trotskylives
8th April 2003, 12:53
THE MASSACRES at the market places in Baghdad have brought home for many the harsh reality of Bush and Blair's war for oil. As in all wars, it is ordinary people, especially young people who pay the price.

Capitalism and war are inherently linked. Since World War Two there has not been one day where there hasn't been a significant conflict somewhere in the world. Each year over $1 trillion is spent on the arms industry while tens of thousands die from hunger or easily preventable diseases. This is the real face of capitalism, where the profits of oil companies and arms manufacturers come before the interests of ordinary people.

However, this is not being met with silence. As the massive anti-war movement that has developed has shown, people are not only opposed to this war, they are willing to take action (in their millions) and are looking for an alternative. I believe that it is not enough to oppose war. We also need to oppose the system that breeds war.

But what is the alternative? The UN has proven itself incapable of stopping this war. In the end, Bush and Blair simply ignored the UN. We must also remember that the UN is responsible for the 1.5 million people who have died in the last ten years as a result of the sanctions on Iraq.

Capitalism is based fundamentally on the profit of the few and the exploitation of the vast majority of people. This inevitably leads to conflict and ultimately war. Therefore there can never be peace or equality under a system which is based on exploitation. only by removing the capitalist system and by replacing it with a democratic socialist society can we consign war, poverty and exploitation to the dustbin of history.

This would mean taking the world's resources out of the hands of the warmongers and capitalists and placing them in the hands of the ordinary people under democratic control. It would mean, for example, taking over the oil fields and using the wealth to eradicate poverty, hunger and disease. It would mean ending the wastage of the arms industry and using the money to dramatically transform the lives of the world's poor for the better. Modern technology currently wasted on trying to develop new and more brutal "smart bombs" would be redirected into medical research and environmentally friendly forms of energy.

chamo
8th April 2003, 19:13
The U$ stock-market went up more than 200 points on the first day of the bombing in Baghdad, shows what true intentions are. Link (http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?f=news/archive/2003/03/21/financial1426EST0132.DTL)

To keep a well-developed country such as the USA in the economic winning line then imperial wars are need to booster the economy and keep them up top while thus eliminating their competitors and then taking their reserves and exploiting their people. Capitalism and war are connected just as nationalism and war are connected. Need for more and more to keep your head above water leads capitalists to kill and steal for their gains and profit. Name a war which has not had economical gain or the intention of such for the US. The second world war got them out of the depression, Vietnam at the point of containing communism and increasing consumer spending and eliminating the threat of a defeated capitalist system, ie: the domino theory idea. The First Gulf War, need I say more? Capitalists are often blind to what their system dictates, though the capitalists on this board seem to have a lack of morals when they say there is "no remorse" for their portfolios going up.

(Edited by happyguy at 7:17 pm on April 8, 2003)