As chancellor, current British prime minister Gordon Brown claimed to have ended the cycle of boom and bust, which has proved impossible under capitalism. The New Labour government borrowed heavily to prolong the boom and we are now entering a severe recession. Big business and its New Labour allies are trying to make working class people pay for their crisis – escalating food and fuel prices and a housing slump, with big cuts in living standards unless we go on strike.
The credit crunch is mainly blamed on “subprime” mortgages in the USA , sold to people with a poor credit history and with high interest rates starting low. This caught many ordinary people out, since most US mortgages are at a fixed rate for the entire term, which (due to high inflation) could lead to many banks around the world that have lent the money for such “prime conforming” mortgages facing bankruptcy. New Labour would probably bail other banks out like when it nationalised Northern Rock (and like the US government recently did with Fannie Mae and Freddie Mac which guarantee only prime conforming mortgages) or lent £50 billion without revealing to whom, but other governments may adopt a different approach.
[On the day I finished writing this document, the US government indeed failed to step in to save Lehman Brothers, the fifth largest investment bank in the world, and it went bankrupt. This is having a big knock-on effect on shares in other banks around the world, with the shares of HBOS (Halifax Bank of Scotland ), RBS (Royal Bank of Scotland ) and Barclays particularly collapsing, despite the Bank of England pumping another £5 billion into the market today. Barclays reportedly tried to launch a takeover for Lehman before it collapsed; we can speculate whether its takeover attempt was an indication that Barclays has a lot of spare money to spend on the takeover, a bluff (to pretend it is not in financial difficulties) , a panic measure (perhaps because it has lent Lehman a lot of money that it could now lose with the bankruptcy) or a desperate attempt to improve its balance sheet with public money (the denial of which caused the takeover attempt to collapse). Whatever the cause, the big fall in Barclays’ share price today will knock confidence in its solvency. If I had savings in HBOS, Barclays or RBS, I’d withdraw them ASAP! The adage that such institutions are “too big to fail” now seems out-of-date, and even if New Labour nationalises more UK banks (which the Tories say they wouldn’t do), shareholders can expect little or nothing for their shares. The collapse of a high-street bank would entail many waiting months for compensation for their savings (if indeed they don’t lose them); New Labour has promised an improved compensation scheme but legislation for it has yet to be passed and banks have refused to finance it in advance. Those with mortgages in a collapsed bank wouldn’t have to pay it back, so some working class people will gain from this financial chaos!]
The economic crisis will therefore be much more severe than most analysts are predicting. To avoid imposing massive tax rises or making massive cuts in public spending, most capitalist governments will probably try to borrow their way out of the crisis. New Labour’s net borrowing has rocketed to around £40 billion a year during the boom, and is on course to rise much higher still as we enter recession. This makes a mockery of Brown’s claims to have been a “prudent” chancellor and his allegations that there is “a black hole in the Tories’ spending plans” (with them promising tax cuts for the rich at their 2007 conference). The Tories and Liberal Democrats are hypocritical too in condemning Brown’s handling of the economy when they plan the same level of borrowing if they came to power.
So how should socialists respond to the economic crisis? Merely pledging a series of reforms that involve greater public spending (such as improving public services, increasing pensions and other benefits or increasing wages) is both an insufficient response to the scale of the problem and could easily be argued against (by pointing out that such reforms could not be afforded without much greater borrowing than already planned by mainstream parties). In my view, we need to point out the need for a sudden and thorough change of society – i.e. a socialist revolution (a term that many socialists are reluctant to use even if they agree with it, but I am less reluctant than most and even include “revolutionary socialist” in my main email address).
--
Steve Wallis (Glasgow, Scotland)
For important/urgent communications, please email:
warcrysteve@...
Blogs: http://groups.yahoo.com/group/steve-wallis-socialist-blog,
http://blog.myspace.com/galaxiasteve
My socialist website: http://www.socialiststeve.me.uk
My pages at MySpace: http://www.myspace.com/galaxiasteve and Bebo:
http://www.bebo.com/SteveW519
Founder, Good Intentions Network: http://www.goodintentionsnetwork.org
Founder, Ethical Capitalism Network: http://www.ethicalcapitalism.net
Founder, Foundation for PR-based Socialism: http://www.PRsocialism.org
Founder, Revolutionary Platform Network: http://www.revolutionaryplatform.net
My socialist band, Red Day: http://www.red-day.net
Author, "Revolution Destroyed? Have I ensured that a world socialist revolution will never happen?": http://www.revolutiondestroyed.net
For discussion of the credit crunch, go to
http://www.revolutionaryplatform.net/forum/index.php?board=156
For discussion of 9/11 conspiracy theories, go to http://www.revolutionaryplatform.net/forum/index.php?board=89