Salient. Official Newspaper of the Victoria University Students' Association. Vol 44 No. 5. March 30 1981
Capitalism for Some
Capitalism for Some
Dear Sir,
In Salient 16/3/81, Gumboot Maniac questions the use of the strike weapon by Trade Unions, and appears on first reading, to have a point. The fallacy of arguments such as his however is contained in the fact that such critics seem to consider actions such as strikes as somehow against the system, or vaguely anti capitalist, when they are, in fact, only the actions of workers seeking in vain to exercise the same economic rights as the capitalist himself.
Capitalism, I suppose, means amongst other things, the right to own private property (Patent goods etc.), the right to do with that property more or less what you will including selling it for as much as you can get, or refusing to sell it at all.
No one seriously objects if a businessman sells his product for as much as he can get, or refuses to sell it because he can't get his price for it. No one objects if an investor withdraws his investment from industry, or refuses to invest at all. Indeed such people may gain a reputation for being good Capitalists even though, in the case of the investor, such activities may lead to bankrupt industries and mass unemployment.
Let the worker however try to be a good capitalist and try to sell his property - his labour - for as much as he can get; or indeed refuse to sell it, or withdraw it by going on strike - such an outcry, such villainy. The State steps in; laws are applied; men are jailed, or threatened with jail; troops and police are mobilised. The worker is not seen as someone seeking to exercise his normal capitalist economic rights. Far from it.
It is true that the State also seeks to regulate the activities of businessmen. Such regulations however are usually badly policed or are ineffectual as in the case of price controls. Or they take the form of subsidies, tax incentives and other such benefits paid by the state to 'encourage' or 'provide incentives' to business.
Certainly the state never uses the police, or troops to force businessmen to do business. Can you remember the last time the state sided with the worker in an industrial dispute?
The fact that the worker, through his union, is not allowed to operate as a good capitalist is a measure of the degree to which capitalist economic rights are not meant to be rights for everyone. And the degree to which capitalism and the state exist to serve the interests of a small minority only.
Yours faithfully,
David Lancashire