[A-List] Re: Scotland: SNP disintegration

["an talla" <an.talla@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx>]

Hi Michael and thanks for your welcome. My problem with the EU is that it
offers nothing to the working class of Scotland, or indeed the rest of
Europe. Privatisation, deregulation and loss of any resemblance of economic
accountability. Now while under capitalism any semblance of economic
accountability may well be largely an illusion the fact that welfare
systems/ public ownership/ pensions are under attack across Europe, under
the guidelines of the ECB, is no illusion for the working class across
Europe. As such i stand opposed to it. My enemies potential enemy is not my
friend, especially when it is the one causing so much hardship with its
reactionary social policies and 'economic restructuring' across the
continent.

I just find it strange that the left in Scotland should seek to play a
leading role in the national liberation struggle only to hand over control
of the Scottish economy to finance capitalists in the ECB. For myself, and I
only speak for myself here, Independence for Scotland is not simply
political independence but must include economic independence. Independence
for the working class must mean that the resources of Scotland are under the
democratic control of the people of Scotland - obviously the great mass of
'the people' are working class, so this in effect means that all the
resources, up to and including the means of production, are under the
democratic control of the working class in Scotland. This is what I would
call 'independence', and it is incompatible with economic control from the
ECB or any other finance capitalist organisation.

I don't think that arguing against the EU means limiting your outlook to
'socialism in one country', (if I had a penny for every time I'd heard
that.....) it is just a realisation that the EU is run by, and in the
interests of, European capitalism as it tries to present itself as a global
force to challenge US economic domination.

So while I would turn my back on the EU, that doesn't mean turning my back
on Europe. I would argue very strongly to advance our struggle we should
look to the formation of Europe wide trade unions as a realistic objective.
however I don't see that it is necessary to hand over economic control to
those who would act against the interests of the working class in order to
achieve this.

Donnie

> Message: 9
> Subject: RE: [A-List] Re: Scotland: SNP disintegration
> Date: Tue, 23 Sep 2003 16:14:55 +0300
> From: "Keaney Michael" <Michael.Keaney@xxxxxx>
> To: <a-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
> Reply-To: a-list@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
>
> Donnie writes:
>
> we wish to see socialism established
> internationally and do not confine our internationalism to the borders =
> of
> the British ruling class. Why though should we work towards the break up =
> of
> the Imperialist British state to hand sovereignty and economic decision
> making over to an even more unaccountable European Union?
>
> -----
>
> Somebody took the bait -- nice to have you aboard, Donnie.
>
> Simple answer: because establishing socialism internationally will, of =
> necessity, involve collaboration with the working class of other =
> countries in struggles that transcend the traditional state boundaries =
> that still frame much of our discussions in "Britain" and Europe more =
> generally. It is not that we should work to hand over our sovereignty to =
> the EU -- it is to recognise that the arena of struggle is much bigger, =
> and that we are a part of a struggle between imperialisms as much as we =
> are a part of a struggle against imperialism. And our internationalism =
> should be informed, first and foremost, by the environment in which we =
> find ourselves and the requirements of struggle appropriate to that =
> environment. And that places us squarely on a European plane.
>
> My basic view is that the biggest threat today to the existence of our =
> species and planet is US imperialism. As Mark Jones put it, our enemy is =
> exterminism, the highest level of imperialism, and the levers of control =
> of this system reside primarily in the USA. Thus our task must be to =
> weaken the USA and its satellites, of which the British state (or at =
> least a significant part of the British state) is foremost. As Mark also =
> repeatedly pointed out, the EU, for the foreseeable future, will never =
> be in a position to pose a challenge sufficient to match that of the US =
> -- militarily it is dwarfed, and assuming that we are successful in =
> ridding the world of the British state the EU's military capacity will =
> be even less. But the development of the EU is clearly an obstacle to =
> untrammelled US imperialism and for that reason alone it should be =
> viewed with much less suspicion and greater objectivity, with respect to =
> the evolving inter-imperialist rivalry. So the false dichotomy of =
> anti-imperialism (undifferentiated) or nothing is precisely that -- =
> false. Advancing the cause of EU integration is coincidental to our =
> project, but nevertheless necessary for the continuing success of our =
> project *for the time being*.
>
> I'm not sure exactly what SSP comrades envisage as the alternative =
> scenario, but "socialism in one country" is unlikely to be a viable =
> option economically or politically. The forces ranged against such a =
> project, and the lack of a social base capable of supporting it, would =
> suggest the need for a more imaginative but no less hard-headed =
> response.
>
> Sorry I must run just now, but I hope you stick around and we can work =
> together (and with others) on this.
>
> Michael