Tag: letters

Dear Editor

A look at our history shows how society has changed; for example from serfdom, to feudal, to what we have now, capitalism. There is no reason to suppose that capitalism, in turn, will not be superceded by the most likely system of socialism.

When challenged, those in control of each system struggled very hard to maintain that control. The capitalist leaders are no different: they have powerful means to retain that control, but are savvy enough to allow general improvements to take place depending on the amount of pressure put on them.

Rapid industrial development throughout the 19^th century, followed by the technical developments of the 20^th century and the digital developments of the 21^st century, have brought problems of trying to manage the vast volume of goods produced – they cannot do so, The only solution they see is to close down places of work, and this, as we know, creates massive poverty and misery. Other capitalist countries act likewise.

As in previous centuries those who own or control the means of production and the land are resisting social changes in society; in fact they are trying very hard to undo much of the collective social progress that has been achieved.

The new social system will not automatically come into existence: it has to be shown to be wanted by the majority, and to work on behalf of the majority.

A. Delahoy

Silverknowes Gardens

Dear Editor

Private ownership of land, industries and material resources continues to be thought of as the natural order of things by the Conservative Party and their allies.

Over very many decades it was realised by people who worked on the land and in the industries that this system of private ownership was wrong – just remember the Clearances and the Enclosures and the forced labour in the mining industry here in Scotland. It was uncaring, it was cruel in its treatment of working people.

Changing the system was the task, but how can it be done? How can the entrenched interests of the owners be changed? Seemingly not by appealing to their better natures! It’s particularly difficult as the private owners in the main had political power, control of police and armed forces, the law and the media – and are not afraid t use them.

People also realised they had common interests in hours of work, pay and conditions in and interests outside of work, and that only by unity on these interests would any advances be made.

Again, over the decades people came to realise that many of these common interests and need for services could best be provided on a common ownership, national basis; it was more fair and efficient and excluded private profit makers. The mines, the railways, power – all used to be held in public ownership and provided decent pay and conditions and future work for families.

The end of the 19^th century, and more so the greater part of the 20^th century, saw an expansion of social caring and understanding of how society should use it’s resources in the interests of everybody. This advance was a political struggle against opposition from owners, backed in the main by Conservatives and their allies.

The tremendous advances in technology have given us the ability to create a more caring and civilised society for all people, but it requires a fight against the system of private ownership which, with its stocks and shares, just creates crisis after crisis. The ability of the people to work is still there, but the owners’ financial manipulation of buying and selling is creating havoc.

The Tories and their allies are right now waging a campaign against all forms of social ownership and caring; in effect putting the clock back, undoing all that has been achieved over the decades. They are trying to privatise, sell off as many areas as possible in spite of the obvious damage being done to people’s lives. They are so committed to their ideological theory of private ownership they cannot, or will not, see just how backward their thinking is.

The Tories do not have a mandate to do this. We did not vote for this in Edinburgh and we are conducting a fight against privatisation; in spite of all their attempts we have recently scored notable victories.  Together we have halted the sell-off of the woodlands, we have kept the refuse collection as a Council service along with other services. The fight against Workfare has prevented some of the exploitation they had planned for the most vulnerable in our society.

But the list of their attacks is long and growing; they want and are seeking to privatise care homes, children’s nurseries, schools, coastguards, police, railways, etc. They are now inserting their deadly ‘virus’ of privatisation within the NHS, which is eating away at it from inside. We must all be aware that the conflict of interest they are planning for our GPs must be monitored and any privatisation of our National Health Service must be resisted and stopped.

A. Delahoy

Silverknowes Gardens