As we trudge our way toward 2020, the World Bank (WB) informs us that fewer people around the world are today living in extreme poverty; that for many, living standards are improving. This is true, but it is also far from the whole picture.
China and India are held up as prime examples where many more people are today living on more than the $1.90 (R27) a day decreed by the WB to equal extreme poverty. But the desperately poor in these two countries started from a very low base. and their marginal economic upliftment came through their labour being sold so cheaply.
The rapid movement of capital and production to cut-price labour destinations has meant some slums moving into marginal affluence while some once marginally affluent areas have declined into slums. Incomes are also stagnating in many regions and falling in others.
For example, in Britain, the fifth largest economy in the world, a recent report revealed that 4.5 million people now live in “dire poverty”. And in the United States, still the world’s largest economy, wages for more than half the working population have stagnated or declined in real terms for the past decade.
At the same time, the wealthiest individuals globally have become much richer. Workers of the world, therefore, suffer swings and roundabouts, with the overall trajectory being fewer jobs and lower pay. “Trickle down” economic policies clearly do not work; worse still, they are destructive.
This is at least recognised by the labour movement in South Africa and by most workers, whether employed or jobless. So there exists a widespread demand for an alternative to what has gone before — and that extends well beyond the state capture decade presided over by President Jacob Zuma.
As a result, and with an election looming, the existing parliamentary parties are claiming to be harbingers of new, improved, even alternative, futures. But promises of a better life for all are just as much the stock in trade of politicians as they are of evangelists.
As that great labour icon and songster, Joe Hill once wrote, such promises amount to “Pie in the sky”. The delivery date is always “bye and bye”.
Evangelists, of course, can never be held to account because they assure us that such rewards arrive only when we die. Or, as Joe Hill put it: “in the sky — way up high”.
As a result of being held to account, most politicians are deft at deflecting criticism, usually by blaming pressures beyond their control or — all too frequently — pointing fingers at scapegoats, in the process often encouraging racism and xenophobia.
These promises and deflections should be interrogated. Critical analysis is essential. When, for example, universal preschool education is promised, initial questions should be: where are the teachers? Who will train them, when and how?
There are also very basic, long-standing questions that should be asked, especially by trade unions professing egalitarian principles. How, for example, can a government, claiming to adhere to democratic, constitutional, principles, use taxes to fund hereditary kings and chiefs who, in many cases, are the descendants of appointees of the colonial and apartheid regimes?
It is these and other questions — above all those about jobs and the wage and welfare gap — that have caused much of the demoralisation, disgruntlement and anger within worker ranks. As a result, there is a quite widespread demand for a political and economic alternative.
The Socialist Revolutionary Workers’ Party (SRWP), recently registered by the National Union of Metalworkers (Numsa), seems to be positioning itself to play such a role. But, incredibly, this party emerged without a political platform other than being anti-capitalist, socialist, revolutionary and Marxist-Leninist, terms that clearly need to be defined.
It is also still to be made clear whether the SRWP will contest the coming elections. If it does, and given the backing of Numsa along with several declared supporters, its electoral prospects could be considerably better than those of the “socialist alternative” of 2014, the Workers and Socialist Party (Wasp).
Wasp was formed in the wake of the Marikana massacre by the small Democratic Socialist Movement, with the apparent backing of groups of striking miners. It was one of 29 parties that contested the 2014 elections where it gained just 8 331 votes out of the more than 18.3 million cast.
However, times have changed. But by how much and in which way? And what remains just as true today as five years ago is a need for clarity about any alternatives to a clearly failing system.
Rhetoric, however radical, is no substitute for policies and a programme for their implementation. If the labour movement wants a real alternative, one that extends democracy, this is the challenge that must be taken on.
In the meantime, to quote the last words of Joe Hill before he died: “Don’t mourn — organise.”
Cape Town, South Africa-based journalist commentator and author specialising in political and economic analysis and labour matters. 
Terry Bell Writes 
Basil
January 13, 2019
Terry
Before they “organise” I suggest that you, with all your wisdom and anecdotal experience appraise them of the facts that Socialism (and its variations on the theme) has proven time and time again, with but few exceptions, to have failed in its lofty goal(s). What unique and different value proposition will this SRWP 2019 hybrid, offer to the working classes in particular and to RSA society in general and which hasn’t before failed miserably? 21st Century requires 21st Century thinking and 21st Century solutions.
Rehashed 1848 rhetoric and “pie in the sky…. bye and bye” promises by the evangelists Marx /Engels et al may be a tad dated?
Did Joe Hill (after having seen the light) not on another occasion sing, “Don’t organise – mourn”?
Perhaps, before embarking on any further expenditure, Labour can arrange an address by the President of RSA, CR himself, on “My journey from rags to riches – Why (1848) Socialism is the wrong bus.”
Terry Bell
January 15, 2019
If, Basil, you can give me a single example of where socialism, the extension of democracy and common ownership, has been practiced for any extended period in the modern age, please let me know. I think, before you simply write of what you refer to as socialism, you should first define what you mean. And if you think the present capitalist system — whether privately orientated laissez faire or the state version — is working and can cope with the rapidly developing technological age, please let me know.
Basil
January 16, 2019
Hi Terry
Thank you for the courtesy of your response.
I agree that a more precise definition of socialism would have been helpful but regrettably, the term has become so loosely defined and so subjective in its use as to become situational and parochial to the point of vagueness. Accordingly, I cannot venture to cite a modern example of (pure) socialism in practice (wtmb) without the need for extensive qualifications of their variations and idiosyncrasies.
The often quoted examples of so-called Nordic socialism, being a case in point.
Perhaps the kibbutzim in Israel pre-1985 would qualify as an isolated case?
The track record of socialism, as a sustainable socio-economic system to correct the failings of those systems it sought to replace or improve, has been less than effective.
My primary concern with your post is that it supports socialism as a desired/alternative destination or mechanism for social and economic reform in RSA and encourages Labour to follow that path.
It disregards the recorded history of failed socialism, and in particular of the anomalies and injustices which emerged when socialist principles were put into practice via the enactment of laws, policies etc. Irrespective of the integrity, desirability, and attractiveness of socialist theory, it too easily succumbs to and fails because of the people factor, or at least those who determine how socialism is to be implemented; an example, the Marx-Engels theory vs the ravages and purges embarked upon by Stalin?
On our own doorstep, the socialist aspirations of the Freedom Charter vs the ignominious reign of JZ.
What happened to the carefully engineered and campaigned support given to JZ by organised labour; loftily raising (and praising) his status under the banner of “the People’s Choice”? He was selected, then elected as the best antidote to the right/capitalist-leaning departures from ANC principles committed by T Mbeki.
We will rue that day and those slogans for generations.
Cry the Beloved Country…again and again.
Capitalism isn’t a shining example of a perfect system but, in spite of its failings, it appears to have offered more people better prospects to raise their living levels, over the centuries than has socialism.
Does it have all the answers to today’s challenges? No.
As deficient as it may be, it is what it is, the devil we know.
Socialism offers little hope or respite as a viable alternative especially if it is to be affixed as an attachment to our current, mixed economic model and more especially to be infused within a culture of entitlement and weakened rule of law which enabled and facilitated the wanton institutionalised pillaging of our Economy and state (infra)structures.
A meaningful indaba of stakeholders under the auspices of enlightened leadership is urgently needed to extricate us from our self-inflicted quagmire.
And then who will tie the proverbial bell around the cat’s neck?